Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Rob Myers <rob AT robmyers.org>]

On 3 Apr 2006, at 22:23, Gary (AUDN) wrote:
> However, adding advertising now “officially” breaks the non- 
> Commercial aspect of the CC license?
Always has done. :-)
>  The Music industry seriously needs a different version of the CC  
> license which allows commercial companies to be allowed to  
> broadcast the work, be it using Podcast, traditional radio,  
> internet radio, in clubs, pubs or cafes etc. for public entertainment.
Musicians could release a closed version of the track as a promo and  
an NC version of the track for online advertising^D^D remixing. I  
think. I am not a lawyer, though.
> This is not just the commercial CC license, as music could not be  
> burnt on a CD and sold, become the brand of a corporation, using to  
> advertise a product, or derivative works made etc.
The NC Sampling Plus license protects against advertising and un- 
transformative derivation. I don't know how it interacts with  
commercial airplay. IANAL.
> Perhaps the non-Commercial license should have an option to allow  
> broadcasting on commercial radio/casting as long as it is not used  
> as part of an advertising message and the track still attributed in  
> a reasonable way.
But this would go against the whole idea of "non-commercial". The  
commercial station would be making money off the track. It is no  
different to burning it to CD and selling it.
> Is this in the realm of CC, or does the industry need a separate  
> alternative to PPL/MCPC/PRS (this is what we have in the UK).
Certainly recording societies need to be more CC-aware. There is some  
work going on to this end in the UK, you could try the CC-UK mailing  
list but I don't think there's any news on that front yet.

- Rob.