Development of Creative Commons licenses

[drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com>]

On Thursday 24 March 2005 07:26 pm, Greg London wrote:
> drew Roberts said:
> > On Thursday 24 March 2005 02:18 pm, Peter Knupfer, H-Net wrote:
> >> -- the author of a work in progress posts it to a paper server for a
> >> comment period, covered by CC BY-NC-ND.  Another user incorporates the
> >> paper, with attribution, into an anthology to be given away online, and
> >> gets the credit for moving the original into full publication first.
> >> The original author's hopes of developing the paper into a chapter or
> >> section of an upcoming book are therefore influenced by this immediate
> >> reuse of her material.  Moral of the tale: don't share works in
> >> progress.
> >
> > A couple of things for clarification...
> >
> > Was the anthology NC? I notice no SA. (This Q is especially for Greg
> > London - Greg, would this be a reasonable use of NC-SA in your mind?)
>
> ShareAlike affects derivatives. A collection/anthology is not a derivative
> but a collection. What seems to be the shaky claim is that
> Alice posts chapter 1 of her book CC BY-NC-ND for comment period.
> Bob incorporates chapter 1 into his anthology and

OK, so perhaps we need another option that would let us choose to limit 
distribution only to share alike "packages."

I may have to stop using the CC licenses if this really works like that. For 
instance, if I release my book CC BY-SA and a group decides to put a few 
chapters on as a play, I would want those viewing the play to have BY-SA 
rights to the performance. Would they?

If I release a poem CC BY-SA, I would want to see all collections where it 
appears to be CC BY-SA.

If things don't work this way, can they be fixed up so they do, or if some 
like it one way and some another, can we fix things up to make all happy?

License multiplication again - which is going to bite us in the end I fear.
>
> "gets the credit for moving the original into full publication first"
>
> If Bob gets credit and not Alice, something is seriously awry with the
> way attribution works. Worst case, Alice AND Bob would get credit
> for first publication.
>
> And if Alice was really only looking to get reviewer feedback
> in a comment period, then she should keep the work "all rights
> reserved" and get her reviewers to all agree to hold her work
> confidential.
>
> I just finished giving feedback on a book about to go to print.
> And that's how they did it.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cc-licenses mailing list
> cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses

-- 
<a href="http://www.lulu.com/commerce/addreg.php?fBuyContent=108334";>
<img src="http://www.lulu.com/themes/common/images/icons/buynow_yellow.gif"; 
border="0" alt="Buy my stuff at Lulu!">
</a>