cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses
List archive
Re: [cc-licenses] short-form of licenses allowed ?
- From: Mike Linksvayer <ml AT creativecommons.org>
- To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] short-form of licenses allowed ?
- Date: Sat, 05 May 2007 12:46:57 -0700
On Sat, 2007-05-05 at 19:55 +0530, shirish wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm using CC licensing in all my correspondence. Now the
> signature can't be very big as I also want to have my PGP signature
> underneath. So it is ok to have it in the way I have it atm or is
> there some shorter way I can use. Please guide.
> --
> Shirish Agarwal
> This work is licensed under the CCNSP 1.0 License. To view a copy of
> this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/nc-sampling
> +/1.0/
Yes, CC licenses explicitly allow for giving notice with the a license
URL rather than a copy of the license.
As a practical matter I wouldn't use "CCNSP" as an abbreviation. AFAIK
nobody has ever used that, so it would not really convey any
information.
Shorter version:
This email is licensed under
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/nc-sampling+/1.0/
Also, I'm not sure why you would want to use this license for email.
Attribution-NonCommercial has very similar characteristics, is much more
widely used, and in my experience is more easily understood. URL for
the current version is http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
Note that I am not a lawyer, etc. :)
--
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/User:Mike_Linksvayer
-
[cc-licenses] short-form of licenses allowed ?,
shirish, 05/05/2007
- Re: [cc-licenses] short-form of licenses allowed ?, Mike Linksvayer, 05/05/2007
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
-
Re: [cc-licenses] short-form of licenses allowed ?,
shirish, 05/06/2007
- Re: [cc-licenses] short-form of licenses allowed ?, Mike Linksvayer, 05/06/2007
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.