Development of Creative Commons licenses

["Takemoto" <timtak AT nihonbunka.com>]

Consider the old adage, "build a better mouse trap, and the world will 
beat a path to your door." As many recognise, this is just not true. 

Economics tells us that both production *and distribution* is vital.

Open source software *seems* only to relate to the means of
production. 

But in this internet age, where every one knows that software can be 
downloaded, it is precisely because the means of distribution is 
safeguarded that open source works. 

Open source software writers are engaged essentially in a swap: they 
give up rights to the production, in exchange for possesion of the means 
of distribution. On the one hand they give everything away (the means 
of production), but on the other, they get everything back (the means 
of distribution).

Sometimes people talk about the "kudos" of open sorce, but it not
just kudos at all. The Internet is a world without distance, as soon
as someone has to quote a URL. Kudos means business. 
 
I suggest therefore that for us text writers to join the Open Source
wave, all we need is a "Strict Share Alike Licence."

Even the word "Strict" is not necessarily needed. All we need to say
is use the SAME licence, dammit. By the same we do not mean,
"the same terms," but the same, same, same. 

That means that derivative works have to be on the net. That means
that the means of distribution can be secured by the creator. 

Or does it? Could text users put derivative works on some internet
backwater, and avoid sharing the means of distribution? 

On the stats of my web site I seem to be able to tell where vistors
have come from. Similarly, on the CC site, there should be a list of
visitors and where they have come from. If CC has that data then
google might be allowed to share it too. 

In other words, if a site has a CC licence, and there is a chance that
someone will press on the link, in that case will the google-bots,
the spiders get there, to ensure the continuity of the web?

Timothy