Development of Creative Commons licenses

[James Grimmelmann <james AT grimmelmann.net>]

Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
> <quote who="Terry Hancock" date="Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 11:19:47PM -0600">
> > I think this is wrong-headed. The safest choice is to leave things as
> > they are. It is always possible to introduce a TPM+PD exception in the
> > future, if it becomes clear that one is needed.
> >
> > OTOH, there is no way to take it back, once it's done.
> >
> > Furthermore, it applies retro-actively to currently licensed works!
> >
> > So there are significant grounds to adopt a conservative attitude.
>
> I think I agree with your prescription  but for different reasons.
> While, unlike you, I'm not ready to declare consensus, it seems obvious
> that the issue is highly contested. In that light, it seem both
> inappropriate and unlikely to change from the status quo.

I agree.  I would prefer a parallel distribution clause, but given the 
present state of the discussion, holding the issue over and leaving the 
licenses unchanged for now would be appropriate.

James