cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses
List archive
Re: [cc-licenses] cc-licenses Digest, Vol 36, Issue 5
- From: drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com>
- To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] cc-licenses Digest, Vol 36, Issue 5
- Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 10:31:50 -0500
On Monday 06 March 2006 10:20 am, Greg London wrote:
> >> Quoting Adam Fields <cc-licenses345982 AT aquick.org>:
> >> > Is this contrary to the spirit of creative commons?
>
> No, that is exactly what Creative Commons set out to enable.
>
> >>quoting drew:
> >
> > I think that the problem may arise from the name itself.
> > "Creative Commons" ... They do not in fact have
> > "a common pool to draw on" in creating new works in
> > keeping with their ideals.
>
> I was never thrilled over the name "Creative Commons"
> because not all CC licenses have anything to do with
> what we think of as a commons: a shared pasture or
> any sort of Public Domain.
>
> I would have rather seen them use a name such as
> "Creative Copyright" or "Some Rights Reserved" or
> something that didn't invoke the image of a shared
> public domain work. But a name is a minor quibble.
Yes, and I am not really calling for it to be changed. I am just trying to
point out where I think some of these mutual misunderstandings arise with
respect to people using CC licences.
> I still support the idea behind CC. And at least
> some of their licenses do in fact support a commons,
> it's just left to the people to decide whether they'll
> use them.
Well, I tend to prefer copyleft type licenses as long as the copyright laws
continue as they are, but I don't see operating by force, other than to,
non-forcefully, modify the current "by force" copyright laws to something
better. (Let's hope high hopes pay off. {not holding breath.})
That is not to say that I would not prefer it if CC was a BY-SA and BY only
operation, but it isn't and I am not looking this gift horse in the mouth. It
is the best I know of right now for what I am about and I will stick with it
until something better comes along and proves itself stable and popular. (I
may dual licence before popularity.)
all the best,
drew
>
> > Of course, I may be missing the mark completely with this thought.
> >
> >> - Rob.
> >
> > all the best,
> >
> > drew
--
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/145261
Record a song and you might win $1,000.00
http://www.ourmedia.org/user/17145
-
Re: [cc-licenses] cc-licenses Digest, Vol 36, Issue 5,
Ŭalabio‽, 03/05/2006
-
Re: [cc-licenses] cc-licenses Digest, Vol 36, Issue 5,
Greg London, 03/05/2006
-
Re: [cc-licenses] cc-licenses Digest, Vol 36, Issue 5,
rob, 03/06/2006
- Re: [cc-licenses] cc-licenses Digest, Vol 36, Issue 5, drew Roberts, 03/06/2006
-
Re: [cc-licenses] cc-licenses Digest, Vol 36, Issue 5,
rob, 03/06/2006
-
Re: [cc-licenses] cc-licenses Digest, Vol 36, Issue 5,
Adam Fields, 03/05/2006
-
Re: [cc-licenses] cc-licenses Digest, Vol 36, Issue 5,
rob, 03/06/2006
-
Re: [cc-licenses] cc-licenses Digest, Vol 36, Issue 5,
drew Roberts, 03/06/2006
-
Re: [cc-licenses] cc-licenses Digest, Vol 36, Issue 5,
Greg London, 03/06/2006
- Re: [cc-licenses] cc-licenses Digest, Vol 36, Issue 5, drew Roberts, 03/06/2006
-
Re: [cc-licenses] cc-licenses Digest, Vol 36, Issue 5,
Greg London, 03/06/2006
-
Re: [cc-licenses] cc-licenses Digest, Vol 36, Issue 5,
drew Roberts, 03/06/2006
-
Re: [cc-licenses] cc-licenses Digest, Vol 36, Issue 5,
rob, 03/06/2006
-
Re: [cc-licenses] cc-licenses Digest, Vol 36, Issue 5,
Greg London, 03/05/2006
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.