Development of Creative Commons licenses

["Jonathon Blake" <jonathon.blake AT gmail.com>]

Rob wrote:

> I think that the CC NC guidelines are very good, and I'm very glad CC are 
> producing them.

They are slightly clearer than the "old" guidelines".

The three issues I have with them are:
i) A. (1.)  (c) defines "allowable NC User" as a non-profit
organization.  The footnotes specifies IRS 501(c)(3), and then tosses
out six of the ten types of groups.

ii) D 1. (d) which allows an organization to "sell" material, as part
of its membership drive.  I'm guessing that the idea here is that your
local NPR affiliate can print out a book, and give away copies, during
their begging for money week.   I can easily see happening, is that an
organization prints up the material, and proceeds to "sell" it, under
the guise of calling it a "membership" premium.   The shadier the
organization, the more likely this is to occur.

iii) An organization that does not have 501(3)(c) status with the IRS
is automatically considered to be using it "commercially."  This
effectively eliminates all usage of NC licenced material by government
agencies.

###

For all practical purposes, A. (1) (b) is a subset of A (1) (c), and
can be deleted.

xan

jonathon
--
Ethical conduct is a vice.
Corrupt conduct is a virtue.

Motto of Nacarima.