Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: [cc-licenses] Proposed Non-Commercial Guidelines

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Mia Garlick <mia AT creativecommons.org>
  • To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] Proposed Non-Commercial Guidelines
  • Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 15:52:35 -0800

hey jonathan,

On Mar 7, 2006, at 3:41 PM, Jonathon Blake wrote:

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".

what are 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.

i attempted to respond to your earlier comments on this in this posting: https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/cc-licenses/2006-March/ 003308.html which was a bit long so let me recap:

as regards excluding religious organizations given the US definition of a not for profit org excludes political organizations, the thinking was that there are three things one should not talk about in polite society - politics & religion being two of them. if the community believes that either or both political nonprofits & religious nonprofits should be able to use NC-licensed works, then
let's change the guidelines to reflect this.

the others were not referred to because they were so specific & arguable come within the category of being charitable orgs. but again - all this can be changed if the community feels necessary & appropriate....


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.


so i also responded to this in the longer posting - short version: offering access to free content in exchange for premium membership renders access conditional upon payment, not optional & thus a breach.

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.


the intent is not to focus on s501(3)(c) because these guidelines are intended to have global reach. we looked to that for guidance & welcome your suggestions & guidance in return. the point you raise about government usage is a good one. it's not an issue that i have seen discussed in conversations about noncommercial use - how should we deal with it?

###

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.
_______________________________________________
cc-licenses mailing list
cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page