Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: [cc-licenses] NonDerivative NonCommercial Licenses

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Ŭalabio‽ <Walabio AT MacOSX.COM>
  • To: cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] NonDerivative NonCommercial Licenses
  • Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2006 01:30:15 +0000


Re: "Greg London" <Email AT Greglondon.Com> & "Rob"
<Rob AT Robmyers.Org>:

Greg London" <Email AT Greglondon.Com>:

CC-NC-ND would be a license you might use if you wanted fans to be able to pass around your work as long as they didn't charge money and didn't modify the work. So, CC-NC-ND has it's uses. Yes, the licenses generally become more restrictive as they combine, but that's the side effect being tinkertoys.

Greg

Under no circumstances would I ever use such an abomination. That is exactly the sort of license I want banned. NC and ND is a necessary evil so that people like Corey can make a living, but people should have these three writes with CC-Licenses:

0. - The right to share the work without restriction.
1. - The right to read the work.
2. - The right to modify the work at least noncomercially.

ND for noncommercial forks violates number two. I would limit ND to only commercial licenses and have it stated in licences with ND that the ND does _"*NOT_APPLY*"_ to noncommercial use.

"Rob" <Rob AT Robmyers.Org>:

Quoting Greg London <email AT greglondon.com>:

To suggest combining ShareAlike with NoDerivatives is a red flag that there is some kind of fundamental misunderstanding going on. And I can't quite figure out where it is.

Yes I'm confused as well.

It is quite simple:

The conditions of the licenses are like ANDs and NOTs:

BY:
AND

SA:
AND

NC:
NOT

ND:
NOT

If we limit ND to only commercial licenses and place in the text for ND that it only applies to commercial uses and is null and void for noncommercial uses, then it is is:

"If commercial, then no derivatives. ¡STOP! If noncommercial allow derivatives and go onto next term if present."

In other words, it means "If then". Let us read the version three license CC-BY-ND-SA for commercial and noncommercial purposes:

CC (LicenseType) BY (AND credit author(s)) ND (NOT allowed commercial derivatives. ¡STOP!) SA (halted at previous line)

If I wanted to modify the work for noncommercial use such as education, the license would read thus:

CC (LicenseType) BY (AND credit author(s)) ND (NOT allowed commercial derivatives, but this is noncommercial derivative so this line does not apply. Go to next line.) SA (AND share this work alike noncommercially).

Basically, I believe that at the heart of all CC-Licenses, should be these freedoms:

0. - The right to share the work without restriction.
1. - The right to read the work.
2. - The right to modify the work at least noncomercially.

In accordance with these rights, ND should only be allowed with commercial licenses and simply not apply to noncommercial uses of commercially licensed works. ¿Do you understand now?

I would like to submit these ideas about inviolable rights which all CC-Licenses must uphold to Creative Commons. ¿How do I do that?



Walabio



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page