Development of Creative Commons licenses

[James Grimmelmann <james AT grimmelmann.net>]

drew Roberts wrote:
> On Tuesday 13 February 2007 07:56 pm, Jonathon Blake wrote:
> > On 2/13/07, tomislav medak wrote:
> > > first reason would be: how do you define 'free'?, or rather 'freedoms',
> > > or 'free enough' to be called that. for instance, freedom to share
> > > licensed works is given by all standard CC licenses and it is a freedom.
> > First, get rid of CC as a brand name. Keep the name for the
> > organization, if you so desire.
> >
> > Debian Legal has a set of four definitions,and three tests that can be
> > used to determine whether  or not something is "free". Anything which
> > passes all of those criteria is "free".  Call that the _Free Content
> > Licence_.
> >
> > The BY and BY-SA variants can be called the _Free Authors Licence_.
> >
> > BY-NC-ND can be relabelled as _The Usage is Banned Licence_
>
> Not so sure this description fits. You can "use" such a book to read or as a 
> door stop... ?
>
> A bit off topic here... Is it legal for a for profit entity to download NC 
> documents off of web sites?

Under step 1 of the draft NC guidelines, no.

James