Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>]

Drew wrote:

> > Rename the licences to:
> >
> > gratis-BY-SA
> > gratis-BY-ND
> > gratis-BY
> > gratis
> >
> > Then include a clause to the effect of "This material may not be sold,
> > transmitted, replicated, duplicated, or otherwise distributed in a
> > manner which cause a charge, whether direct, indirect, or associated
> > with the material, to the recipient of the material.  All expenses in
> > distribution have to be born by the distributor, who may not receive any
> > compensation for the distribution."
>
> This is not what I want for my BY-Sa works at all. I want BY-SA(libre) and 
> they can charge if the market will permit it.

That isn't for your CC-BY licence.  It is to replace CC-NC licences.

I will grant that CC-BY-SA might get confused with gratis-BY-SA.  But 
with that clause, it should be pretty obvious to anybody that reads it, 
that gratis-style licences mean that distribution will cost them money 
that they won't be able to recoup.

> Unless I missed you meaning an you intend gratis to replace NC, which I now 
> think you might.

I did. I didn't make that part clear.

> Now, I might like some tweaking as to what is considered "mere 
aggregation" but that is a separate issue.

Is it just me, or is what constitutes "mere aggregation" raising its 
head in a number of software projects (both open source, and closed source)?

xan

jonathon