Development of Creative Commons licenses

["Greg London" <greglondon.1 AT gmail.com>]

Well, after yesterday's discussion,

I think it's abundantly clear that

there will always be folks who would

rather wrap themselves up in a flag,

call it Freedom, and to hell with what

actual actions their "Freedom" actually

allows.

 

These people are using the word "Freedom"

to have completely unrelated meanings just

so they can cast  themselves as fighting for

"Freedom". Wrap themselves in some meaningless

flag. So their actions become irrelevant.

 

And so, I think it's gotten to the point that

thanks to these people that the word

"Freedom" has become completely useless.

 

Free as in Speech?
Free as in Beer?

You might as well say

Free as in Gru.

 

"Free" has become a completely nonsensicle word

for people dealing with copyright and licenses.

 

You might as well start using the word "Patriotic"

or something. That's got a LONG history of being

applied to completely arbitrary definitions.

 

"Whatever I'm doing is patriotic,

whatever you're doing is not".

 

I suppose it is too much to expect people to use

words in a responsible way, to use "Freedom"

to mean what all the software folks have worked

out in the years past. But that's just not as fun I guess.

 

And so in ignoring the all the work done by all

the organizations in the past, poeple using

Creative Commons licenses get to throw out

a more restrictive definition. They get to use

the most restrictive licenses such as CC-NC-ND-BY,

and they get to say they're doign something about

freedom.

 

It has become a joke.

 

One might as well wrap themselves in a flag,

call themselves a patriot, and condemn anyone

who looks at their actions. It's the self applied

label of "Patriot" and "Freedom" that has become

important. If a person says they're a patriot or that

they're for Freedom, then you cannot question that

label based on their actions.  Apparently.

 

And so, the term Freedom has become useless.

Oh, sure, it's great for propaganda purposes.

 

"Join CC and fight for FREEDOM!"

 

But it doesn't actually MEAN anything consistent.

It doesn't mean that the works are actually free

for a community to use as they wish. It doesn't

mean that the author and the community are

equals to the work. It doesn't mean anything.

 

It has become a warm fuzzy that simply means

you BELONG to some organization and what

actions you take have become irrelevant.

 

It has become purely political. And you can simply

look at the Democrat and Republican parties.

They are both self-described patriots. and they

both describe the others as unpatriotic.

Their defintions have become so arbitrary that

about the only thing that you can really say

the word "Patriot" means to them is that you

must belong to their party to be a patriot.

 

And so, with all the twisting and turning,

with all the dictionary games being played

to find some connotation of the word "Freedom"

and some connotation of the word "Commons",

I think it is safe to say that the words are becoming

diluted to the point that the only really objective

measurable thing they mean is membership

to a group.

 

You are fighting for Freedom and building some

kind of Commons if you are a member of CC.

If you use their licenses. What the license actually

does and does not allow the public to do has become

irrelevant. The words don't mean anything.

The actions of the license don't mean anything.

 

The only thing that is important is that you are a member,

that you use a CC license. Do that and you're doing

something for freedom, for a commons.

 

Is it free as in speech? No clue.

Is it free as in beer? Who knows.

 

"Free" has become so meaningless that you might as well say

 

Free as in Gru.