Development of Creative Commons licenses

["Kevin Phillips (home)" <tacet AT qmpublishing.com>]

>From the perspective of a noob (not a crit or complaint - no offence
intended) :

I was directed here from ccMixter with a question to which nobody answered
or offered a signpost, or friendly nudge.  Probably because nobody genuinely
knew the answer, or felt compelled to help out.

I picked up a conversation which interested me, which WAS about a license
issue.

Others took part.

The conversation got flamed, right about the time it would probably have
ended naturally.

Fortunately I came away with a slightly different opinion of SA and NC
licenses which I wouldn't have gathered from a legal document.  Thanks to
Drew and the others willing to provide tone to my particular shade of grey.

Unfortunately I'm less likely to wish to ask further questions or continue
threads in the knowledge that doing so may be considered boring or grey.

imho fwiw I think you guys need to make a decision as to the goals of your
mailing list.

Is it here to allow you guys to thrash out aspects of the licenses?  If you
don't want noobs like me "remixing" old ideas then make it a private
list....and make sure ccMixter stop forwarding folks here.

Is it here to help people like me find answers to the odd license question?
If so you may want to answer folks swiftly, even if it's a firm "no" or
"sorry" they'll have less incentive to stick around kicking their heels.

Is it here to cater for a very specific thread of licensing?  Then you may
need to split things into sub-threads but PLEASE don't start using vague
terms like "off topic".  I've seen far too many great mailing lists
fragmented into generic useless terms.

You could always just leave things as they are and buy a mouse with a scroll
wheel ;)

Over and out,
Kevin

#d0d0d0


----- Original Message -----
From: "Luis Villa" <luis AT tieguy.org>
To: "Javier Candeira" <javier AT candeira.com>; "Discussion on the Creative
Commons license drafts" <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 2:15 AM
Subject: [cc-licenses] thread getting incredibly dull- do we need a -otlist?
[was Re: NC considered harmful? Prove it...]


> This thread (rather, this complete rehash of things which have been
> discussed over and over again) is getting terribly repetitive and
> dull. Can it end? Nothing that has been said since very early in the
> thread has been new for some years now.
>
> Better yet, can there be a cc-licenses-offtopic or something similar
> that such discussions can preemptively be shunted to when they get
> repetitive, or of interest only to a few? I find that generally the
> signal-to-noise ratio on this list is quite bad, and I have a very
> high tolerance for such things. Maybe a cc-licenses-ot, or just a
> general policy of actively encouraging such discussions to move
> off-list, would help that.
>
> Luis
>
> On 3/22/07, Javier Candeira <javier AT candeira.com> wrote:
> > Kevin Phillips (home) wrote:
> > >> Writers do not really have such alternatives, as a body
> > >> of text is a body of text is body of test...
> > >
> > > Audio books are a good possibility, or other alternative ways to
deliver the
> > > "text".
> >
> > And as anyone can make an audiobook off a by-nc-sa novel, the only
> > difference with by-sa is that -nc only allows the novelist to sell the
> > audiobook.
> >
> > >> Once you've read
> > >> something, you've read it; if it is very good, you might wish to read
> > >> it again, but are unlikely to wish to read it every day or hang it on
> > >> your wall.
> > >> S.M.
> > >
> > > ok. So you need to come to my house and explain to my fiancee why she
> > > doesn't actually need to buy all of Cory Doctorow's books because he
has
> > > them online for free download.  :)   She loves books, likes to carry
them
> > > around and read them on trains, swap them with friends.  She's an
active
> > > bookmoocher and doesn't seem to be so unique in this regard.
> >
> > Market for novelists is a bit bigger when you not only consider the
nutters.
> >
> > > It's apparently also essential to have more than one version of a
book,
> > > especially limited edition shiny covered highly-stroke'able expensive
ones!
> > > :)  ...prefereably signed...
> >
> > Of course. And even translations into languages you don't understand.
It's
> > the covers, you know? Still, we nutters ('us nutters'?) are a limited
> > market. Most readers pick up whatever cheap paperback edition.
> >
> > -- j
> > _______________________________________________
> > cc-licenses mailing list
> > cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
> >
> _______________________________________________
> cc-licenses mailing list
> cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
>
>