Development of Creative Commons licenses

["Douglas Pollard" <Dougpol1 AT adelphia.net>]

   Here is a little something from a different perspective as regards CC. 
Last year I made up an hour long DVD of living aboard a sailboat in 
FortLauderdale and sailing to the Bahamas spending the winter doing all the 
things you do on a trip like that and returning To Fort Lauderdale. I didn't 
have all the photos I needed and I added music. I didn't worry about 
copyright as I was going to give copy's to my kids and no one else.. 
Everyone including friends that I showed it too really liked it.
   I thought I might remove all the copywrited stuff add CC music and 
pictures and put it on line free under CC.  I am finding it almost 
impossible to find stuff that I can use because so many pictures film clips 
and music have different conditions for use.   I also have not been able to 
figure out if it's ok to give credit on a separate page at the end of the 
cd. I am beginning to think that CC is not practical for use in something 
like I am trying to do. Seems like there should be a different search engine 
for each different type of license. If not yet down the road someplace. 
Doug

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Terry Hancock" <hancock AT anansispaceworks.com>
To: "Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts" 
<cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 5:53 PM
Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] Founders as a module? was Re: Getting to Version 
3.0


> Greg London wrote:
> >  Founders's isn't being adopted in any significant numbers. I think
> >  any sort of term-limit-non-commercial license would fare even worse.
>
> I don't think the term-limit principle is the reason for the failure of
> Founder's.
>
> I think the reasons are:
>
> 1) It's not a license at all, but a copyright purchasing contract
> arrangement.
>
> 2) It's too complicated, and easy to misunderstand.
>
> 3) It requires agent-level trust in the Creative Commons organization.
>
> 4) It requires an exchange of money -- transactional cost.
>
> 5) It is fundamentally incompatible with the other CC license modules.
>
> 6) It is not marketed in any appealing way.
>
> As such, it is wide-open to FUD, and it's not a big surprise to me that it
> failed so badly. Ultimately, it failed because it *isn't* a license 
> module.
>
> Or so it would seem to me.
>
> Cheers,
> Terry
>
>
> --
> Terry Hancock (hancock AT AnansiSpaceworks.com)
> Anansi Spaceworks http://www.AnansiSpaceworks.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> cc-licenses mailing list
> cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses