Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Mike Linksvayer <ml AT creativecommons.org>]

On Thu, 2007-04-26 at 12:30 -0400, James Grimmelmann wrote:
> Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote:
> > One advantage you get by doing this at the license level, is that the
> > "terms" of the license can be understood by machines.
> > 
> > (Having to use a "BY-SA" and then "waive" the "BY" part does NOT have 
> > this.)
> 
> There are aspects of any attribution that will require processing beyond
> simply "attribution required" or "attribution not required."  If you
> have to give attribution, you are already required to (a) keep intact
> copyright notices (even if they weren't part of the work itself), (b)
> present the author's name, (c) present the names of any Attribution
> Parties, (d) present the title of the work, and (e) present any supplied
> URI to licensing information.  Tools that decide what attribution is
> needed already need to go beyond the License Elements themselves.

That's right.  See what we're testing for machine-readable attribution
at http://labs.creativecommons.org/dhtmllicense/ (see "more
information...") and the demo at
http://labs.creativecommons.org/metadata/

It would be possible to have metadata express "attribution waived" in
the same way if that's what people want and it works legally.

-- 
  http://wiki.creativecommons.org/User:Mike_Linksvayer