Development of Creative Commons licenses

[rob AT robmyers.org]

Quoting Hannes <hannes AT atalante.org>:

> I think many people are drawn to the CC licenses because they aren't
> forced to read the full legal code to get an understanding of how the
> license works. My notion is that people who have not read the legal code
> in detail and who know nothing of sync licenses and the like assume that
> movies are handled as other collective works. That's why I see a problem
> in that movies are an exception, and that it's not made clear in the
> summary.

Are movies collective works in law? It would be strange if they were.

> Another concern of mine is how the SA can be interpreted. Like you say,
> I'm quite sure many believe that SA also refers to any compilations that
> the work is used in. I do agree with you that there _should_ be a way to
> force all collective works to be SA as well, and I also think that the
> SA of today that refers to derivative works should be made more clear in
> the license summary.

I think SA's stance on collective works comes from the GNU GPL. That 
allows Free
software to be distributed alongside non-Free software. This may or may not be
appropriate for various kinds of collective creative works.

(I am not a lawyer, I am not CC).

- Rob.