cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses
List archive
- From: "Greg London" <email AT greglondon.com>
- To: "Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts" <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: distribution of licenses
- Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 11:51:04 -0500 (EST)
Evan Prodromou said:
> On Tue, 2005-01-03 at 12:26 +0100, Branko Collin wrote:
>
>> IMO it is already great that a lot of authors are using a license,
>> and a CC lincense at that. It provides ease of mind to the end-users.
>
> I think it would be really interesting to see a pie chart of licenses by
> how many units were redistributed and how many new derivative works were
> created.
>
> I'm pretty sure the *-NC-* licenses would dwindle to zero.
I'd believe that, which is why NC combined with SA seems pointless
to me. If NC derivs dwindle to zero, that those few derivatives are
sharable is moot.
So then my question is "If NC-SA doesn't make sense, why is it the
biggest slice of the pie chart?"
Or to flip it around, "Is there something that CC could do to better
explain the licenses such that combinations like this become less
common?"
-
Re: Downstream relicensing
, (continued)
- Re: Downstream relicensing, drew Roberts, 03/09/2005
- Re: Downstream relicensing, Rob Myers, 03/09/2005
- Re: Downstream relicensing, Branko Collin, 03/09/2005
- Re: Downstream relicensing, drew Roberts, 03/07/2005
- Re: distribution of licenses, drew Roberts, 03/07/2005
- Re: distribution of licenses, Todd A. Jacobs, 03/08/2005
-
Re: distribution of licenses,
Branko Collin, 03/01/2005
-
Re: distribution of licenses,
Evan Prodromou, 03/01/2005
-
Re: distribution of licenses,
Greg London, 03/01/2005
- Re: distribution of licenses, Branko Collin, 03/01/2005
-
Re: distribution of licenses,
Greg London, 03/01/2005
-
Re: distribution of licenses,
Todd A. Jacobs, 03/05/2005
- Re: distribution of licenses, drew Roberts, 03/05/2005
-
Re: distribution of licenses,
Evan Prodromou, 03/01/2005
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.