Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Terry Hancock <hancock AT anansispaceworks.com>]

Greg London wrote:
> On 4/25/07, matt draghi <mattdraghi AT hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Does anyone know if there is a license for share alike, not requiring
>> attribution?
> 
> You can use ShareAlike. And then simply not provide any attribution
> information.
> see paragraph 4.c of this:
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode

Ick, no! People do this all the time, not usually with this intent. It
just creates the impression that compliance is impossible.

If you really want this, put something positive in, like "No attribution
is necessary. Or 'there is no attribution text required'." That should
work either as an extension to the license or as an empty attribution
text. In fact, I think under the terms of BY you could even demand that
your name NOT be used for derivatives.

Of course, IANAL.

> I'm unclear how on exactly how you would provide your information
> without making it a requirement. i.e. provide it but specify it is
> optional.

You can always give up more rights in a work.


>> I am not even sure I want to force them to say what kind of license it
>> has.
> 
> well, they would have to, or no one else would know its share alike
> and know they can't add more restrictions to the work.

Yeah, that's pretty definite.  I think this is another reason for By,
though. Unless the work is marked as yours, you can't reasonably control
its distribution (who am I responsible to, if no one is named?)

-- 
Terry Hancock (hancock AT AnansiSpaceworks.com)
Anansi Spaceworks http://www.AnansiSpaceworks.com