Development of Creative Commons licenses

[drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com>]

On Wednesday 25 April 2007 06:15 am, Björn Terelius wrote:
> Lets try to keep the discussion constructive. I'll try to summarize the
> main topics so far.
>
> The ordinary CC license does a good job in giving artists an easy way of
> choosing licensing conditions for their creations. At present the options
> are BY, SA, ND and NC, and there does not seem to be any strong dislike of
> these options when applied to content. 

Just for the record, I, at least, have a strong dislike for ND and NC when 
applied to content. Possibly because it is done so under a "creative commons" 
banner, possibly for the issues I have with copyright as currently practiced 
in general, possibly for both reasons and even possibly for even as yet 
undiscovered reasons.

So, it is not fair to say that there is no strong dislikefor NC and ND. It 
could be more like not wanting to fight that fight at this time. (Not the 
words I really want, but I can't seem to find them this morning.)


> As Joachim Durchholz pointed out, 
> the Creative Commons discourages all use of the licenses when applied to
> software, because they were not written with software in mind. 

Would it be good enough for you if CC said that ND and NC-ND were "safe" for 
software though not "recommended" for such?

And I think Greg meant NC was unsafe, not ND, reread his post.

> The GPL and 
> LGPL may be considered roughly equivalent to BY-SA and BY respectively (but
> I would contest this, as the GPL does not have any clear BY clause). This
> leaves the NC and ND options.

Possibly because the BY clause is too much like the advertising clause of the 
original BSD licenses?
>
snip
>
> I think it is unfortunate that CC does not extend this help to programmers,
> and I see no reason (other than the practical) why it hasn't been done. At
> the moment, all major software licenses are either completely Free or
> proprietary ("All right reserved"). IMHO I think it would be great if
> programmers, too, could easily mark their creative work with the freedoms
> THEY want it to carry.

IMHO (and I do not use that FLA lightly here) Creative Commons should take a 
stand for the creative commons and drop NC and ND completely as they have 
basically nothing to do with a commons as far as I can see.

IMHO they would be better to start an unrelated entity to develop and promote 
NC and ND if they believe those licenses to be useful.

I proivide you with this opinion here so that you will not think that there 
is 
no one out in the wild holding such opinions and to help you in your further 
analysis of this whole thing.
>
snip
>
> Regards
> -Bjorn Terelius

all the best,

drew
-- 
(da idea man)