Development of Creative Commons licenses

[rob AT robmyers.org]

Quoting drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com>:

> I am not advocating one way or another on this in this post, but to put some
> thoughts as to why people may think this, it may be related to how we make
> including a BY-SA song in a movie cause the movie to be a derivative work of
> the song when in fact it isn't? Thoughts? That is what the sync language does
> isn't it? (I am going from memory here.)

This is what the sync language does, yes. I'm guessing it's done to match
people's expectations / social contract, like the way NC redefines file 
sharing
to be non-commercial, which it isn't under US law.

Most people would regard use of an image to illustrate an essay as a higher
degree of entanglement than mere aggregation, although it doesn't make the
essay a derivative of the image because the essay has been written without
reference to the image. The two will most likely be brought together only for
publication. But the published article feels like a derivative, and at the
desktop publishing level the file containing the typeset article might include
the data for the image or a link to the image that it will not print without,
which in fact might qualify as a derivative (I Am Not A Lawyer, This Is Not
Legal Advice).

The problem is that making a strong case for this in the name of 
copyleft would
serve copyright far more.

- Rob.