cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Re: [cc-licenses] cc-licenses Digest, Vol 36, Issue 21

From: REMOVED <******@gmail.com>
To: cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] cc-licenses Digest, Vol 36, Issue 21
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 18:20:10 +0000

Hi.

Thanks for the replies so far.

I am aware that CRC is a bit misplaced in the Creative Commons environment. I contacted Lawrence in the first place because I believe there is some commonality of ideology for the advancement of culture in both creative commons licensing and what I propose via CRC. I was also hoping that, if UAL want to help work on and promote the idea, that I might be able to garner support for a balanced debate in taking the idea forward.

I need help in all areas of development, as essentially I still a one man band looking for like minds to work on it. But hey, if I end up on my own making contracts with the help of an average lawyer which then get ripped to shreds in court then so be it... I'll either go mad trying or end up with something that other artists might find useful too.

REMOVED

cc-licenses-request AT lists.ibiblio.org wrote:

Send cc-licenses mailing list submissions to
cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
cc-licenses-request AT lists.ibiblio.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
cc-licenses-owner AT lists.ibiblio.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of cc-licenses digest..."

Today's Topics:

1. Re: Proposed Non-Commercial Guidelines (Mia Garlick)
2. Re: Proposed Non-Commercial Guidelines (Mia Garlick)
3. Re: NonDerivative NonCommercial Licenses (drew Roberts)
4. Re: Proposed Non-Commercial Guidelines (Greg London)
5. Re: Proposed Non-Commercial Guidelines (Greg London)
6. Customizable Resales Contract (REMOVED)
7. Re: Customizable Resales Contract (rob AT robmyers.org)
8. Re: Customizable Resales Contract (Greg London)
9. Re: Customizable Resales Contract (rob AT robmyers.org)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 15:44:46 -0800
From: Mia Garlick <mia AT creativecommons.org>
Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] Proposed Non-Commercial Guidelines
To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts
<cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <44A4FA39-8AC9-4906-A6A9-C32480F4D30C AT creativecommons.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed

hey greg,

thanks. sorry for provoking you. glad that CC can inspire such passion though :-)

rgds, mia

On Mar 7, 2006, at 2:52 PM, Greg London wrote:

Mia,

My apologies for my recent outburst towards you.
My behaviour was inexcusable. I lost my cool
and took it out on you, adding further underved
injury to an already thankless job. Given it
was such a public outburst I feel it requires
a public apology.

I am sorry.

Greg

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

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 15:52:35 -0800
From: Mia Garlick <mia AT creativecommons.org>
Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] Proposed Non-Commercial Guidelines
To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts
<cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <AF4C7441-D01D-485B-8C75-0D70184604DF AT creativecommons.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed

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

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 18:54:45 -0500
From: drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com>
Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] NonDerivative NonCommercial Licenses
To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts
<cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <200603071854.45352.zotz AT 100jamz.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

On Tuesday 07 March 2006 05:58 pm, Jonathon Blake wrote:

Drew wrote:

Greg, you do not specifically address his point though. I think from what
you are saying, you would tell him to just use BY-NC and he will get the
same bang for the buck as BY-NC-SA, the thing is, he is considering only
BY-NC-ND or BY-NC-SA.

This is an issue I have touched upon before.

Based upon the feedback I've had, people do not understand the BY-NC
licence. [Their questions invariably are

i) Can I redistribute this?
ii) Can I make an extract of this?

With either BY-NC-ND or BY-NC-SA, the question I get is "I want to use
this in my church. Is that OK.?"

Regardless of what CC has to say with respect to BY-NC and BY-NC-ND and BY-NC-SA, this link may impact the answer to that question as well:

http://www.mpa.org/copyright/church.html#9

"Yes, "the religious services exemption" in the Copyright Law permits for the performance of copyrighted religious works in the course of services at places of worship or at religious assemblies."

Seems there is something called "the religious services exemption" - does anyone else know more about this?

I have been wondering lately about copyright on religious works and the US seperation of church and state idea.

xan

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

Motto of Nacarima.

all the best,

drew

Re: [cc-licenses] cc-licenses Digest, Vol 36, Issue 21, REMOVED, 03/10/2006