Development of Creative Commons licenses

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

Mia wrote:

> what are the "old" guidelines?

Perhaps that is the wrong term.  I was referring to the material on
the old wiki.  [Whose URL I posted earlier today.]

> as regards excluding religious organizations given the US definition of a 
> not for profit org excludes  political organizations,

a)  They are excluded for reasons related to conflict of interest.  [A
For-Profit organization has a different set of restrictions, in making
"political speech".]
b) There is section in the IRS code that covers non-profit political
organizations.

> polite society - politics & religion being two of them.

That is a null reason.

> 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.

By that logic, churches, and other religious bodies should not be
excluded, because they do more charitable work, than any other group
of organizations in the world.   [Especially since shrub, and his i
regime are touting "faith based' brainwashing as the cure for all
social ills, except corporate  greed.]

Especially since athletics is nothing more than a advertising outlet
for corporations.  [This includes everything from the US National
Olympic Committee, to your local Little League.     The entire
athletic industry --- both amateur and professional, is run by the
marketing arms of Nike, Adidas, and their competitors.   Local
organizations have virtually no say anymore.  (This includes which
children get to play on your Little League team.)]

>all this can be changed if the community feels necessary & appropriate....

> 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.

So you have no problems with an organization putting a BY-NC-ND book
on sale in its gift shop for $100, because the book is the premium
that is given to people, when they purchase a membership?  [I know of
several non-profits that do that.  The first the member hears of them
being a member, is when they start to receive the monthly, or
quarterly request for donations to the cause, because of their
"special member status".]

> the intent is not to focus on s501(3)(c) because these guidelines are 
> intended to have global reach.

Then list the defining legislation for other countries.  Income Tax
Act Clause 12 A, for India, or The Charities Act of 1993, Section 8,
for England. and throw a\out the discussion about what is, or is not
included.

Phrasing would be:
[Questions start with the number zero, not one.]

0.  "Is the requester an individual"?
"Yes".  (Go to Question x.)
"No"  (Go to Question 1.)

1:  "Is the organization listed under the Charities Act of 1993,
Section 8 (England), IRS Code 501(c)(3) (US), Income Tax Act Clause 12
(India), or similar legislation in your country? [Create a page on the
Wiki that lists the defining law of the various countries.  Put a
footnote in the flowchart that refers to that page, along with the
standard legal disclaimer.]

"Yes"  The organization is "an acceptable NC user". (Go to Question x )
"No"  (Go to question 2)

2:  Is the organization a government agency?
"Yes"  then the organization is an "an acceptable NC user".(Go to Question x).
"No", (Go to Question 3)

3: Is the organization a copy shop, ISP, or similar service, doing an
action at the request of "an acceptable NC User"?
"Yes"  (Go to Question x)
"No"  This would be a commercial usage, and a violation of the NC Licence.

> Government usage ... how should we deal with it?

How about adding it to the flowchart, as described above.

xan

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

Motto of Nacarima.