Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Mike Linksvayer <ml AT creativecommons.org>]

Nancy Ide wrote:
> We love the CC "By" license, but the problem is that the CC makes it  
> pretty clear that the "By/Attribute/non-commercial" license is the  
> "right" one to use, and therefore very few authors use "By". And for  
> the purposes it was intended to serve, "By/Attribute/non-commercial"  
> may well be the right license. I am trying to make it clear that  
> there is another purpose that the CC licenses do not address.

Where does CC say that BY-NC-SA is the "right" license to use?  The
default choices at http://creativecommons.org/license/ obtain a plain BY
license.

> Our issue with CC is simply, why couldn't there be a license that  
> allows for research use, along the lines I described? I.e., ability  
> to re-distribute the text, with full restrictions on "re-publishing"  
> all or part of it (except within fair use) in any other form except  
> as a part of a research resource, and to use it for linguistics  
> research (which may or may not--most of the time, not--result in a  
> commercial by-product)?

There could be such a license, but in general CC is not in the business
of creating niche license.  Look through the cc-licenses archives,
you'll see all kinds of them proposed.

If CC did create such a license it would be a long time (if ever) it had
enough uptake to be useful to you.  FWIW there's lots of PD and BY
licensed stuff out there you can use.  This Google query finds it
excluding anything with NC, ND or SA properties (replace "word" with any
search string you want):

http://www.google.com/search?q=word&as_rights=(cc_publicdomain|cc_attribute).-(cc_noncommercial|cc_nonderived|cc_sharealike)

-- 
  http://wiki.creativecommons.org/User:Mike_Linksvayer