Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: [cc-licenses] CC homepage

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Gregory Maxwell" <gmaxwell AT gmail.com>
  • To: aguadamu AT staffmail.ed.ac.uk, "Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts" <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] CC homepage
  • Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 10:31:40 -0400

On 4/25/07, Andres Guadamuz <a.guadamuz AT ed.ac.uk> wrote:
I agree thoroughly with James. The FSF does not have a trade mark over the
usage of the word "freedom", and I don't think that the way it's utilised in
the CC website is either confusing or problematic.

There is a small minority of people familiar with the terminology, and who
have a very good n idea of the various movements, ideologies, licensing
methods and licence elements involved.

Having presented on FLOSS and CC to a variety of audiences, I can convey
(anecdotally at least) that your average punter doesn't care whatsoever
about the many competing definitions, and finds them confusing. I cannot see
how the use of the word "rights" instead of "freedoms" will alleviate
whatever perceived public's misconceptions. No amount of website space will
do that job.

If there were actual interest in being accurate it would be reasonable
to talk about the freedoms that the licenses *restores*... Each
person started with freedom, but to encourage the creation of content
our societies abridged that freedom. A growing number of content
creators have realized that they don't need some or all of the
abridgement, so we restore some of or all the freedoms.

Of course, if you only restore only a small amount of freedom it isn't
accurate to describe a work as free... Exactly where the bar is placed
is a matter worthy of discussion, but I don't think that it really
impacts the word choice here.




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page