Development of Creative Commons licenses

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

On Monday 28 March 2005 07:15 am, Evan Prodromou wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-03-27 at 11:26 -0500, drew Roberts wrote:
> > Specifically, I would like to be able to limit use in "Collective Works"
> > and in "compilations" if we get there as a result of an earlier post, to
> > collections and compilations where all of the works are licensed under
> > the same license, or other approved "copyleft" license (that allows
> > commercial use) where the original license allows such use.
> > I have been using CC BY-SA for my work, knowing full well that I did not
> > have a full grasp on the license, but willing to take certain risks.
> > However, as I am learning more, I do not think I want to continue on with
> > this license in the absence of these options.
> >
> > Am I missing something that should cause me to reconsider?
>
> Such a license would not be Open Source, per Open Source Definition item
> #9. It would not be allowed in, say, Debian.
>
> ~Evan

I mean no disrespect, but, so?

I am not talking about code. The GPL is still my license of choice there.

Also, debian is my distro of choice for a good while now.

I am talking of my writing and other artistic endeavours.

I would like such a license. I may be talked out of using it, we will see. I 
would like it if my works could be included in debian, but I have other 
priorities in asking for this.

Now, check this link:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/legalcode

That is the legal code for CC BY-NC-SA

and this link:

http://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines

which is The Debian Free Software Guidelines (DFSG)

Doesn't the CC BY-NC-SA license fail on the very first point?

1. Free Redistribution

The license of a Debian component may not restrict any party from selling or 
giving away the software as a component of an aggregate software distribution 
containing programs from several different sources. The license may not 
require a royalty or other fee for such sale.

As opposed to the one I am calling for failing at # 9. # 9. # 9. ~;-)

So, I would like the option. I may or may not decide to use it. I am a bit 
bent out of shape right now as moves are afoot in my country as we speak to 
bring fear and terror into the hearts of the people living here. Jail time 
and a $50,000.00 fine apparently for simple posession of a single "illegal" 
dvd or cd disk.

Right now, I do not want my works being used for the profit of the camp that 
agitated for these laws, or by the camp that is pushing for the enforcement 
of these laws, or any of their cohorts and supporters. Perhaps I have to take 
this risk, but I am not happy with it. (I know compulsary licenses will leave 
me no choice if they are invoked by the way.)

So, I am looking for options to deny them revenue from my work which they can 
use to agitate for even more off the wall laws.

Hey, perhaps I would like the equivalent of a BY-SA type license where I 
could 
deny the use of my work to anyone who did not immediatly put all of their 
work under an approved "copyleft" license and/or agree to place all of their 
current works that are older than, ok, I don't know, 14 years in the public 
domain and continue to do sa as their works became 14 years old. WOuld that 
do the trick? How is that for unreasonable? Again, I am a bit hot with this 
particular issue right now. Sorry if that causes trouble, I don't mean to do 
so.

all the best,

drew