Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Evan Prodromou <evan AT prodromou.name>]

On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 16:16 -0800, Mike Linksvayer wrote:

> >      3. What is the advantage of the "CC0" brand over the previous
> >         Public Domain Dedication? Is it a sufficient advantage to
> >         justify any confusion in people's minds about the two projects?
> 
> I know nothing about branding, sorry.

s/brand/name/ . "What are we gaining by using the new name 'CC0' rather
than the old 'Public Domain Dedication'?"

I think the answer is something like, "Using 'CC0' clearly marks the
difference between a work _actually_ being in the public domain,
something that varies by jurisdiction and that the creator can't fully
control (or so we think), to a work being _effectively_ in the public
domain (to the extent possible under applicable law), which the creator
_can_ control."

I think that's clear enough that people will be able to understand the
change and the need for CC0, especially if the PDD is deprecated in
favour of CC0.

> >      4. How will CC0 be positioned next to the six core licenses? Will
> >         it be an option on the license chooser?
> 
> The obvious placement would be wherever the PD dedication is linked
> now, but  better ideas are welcome.

That's what I thought, but I wanted to check. It seems like keeping both
the PDD and CC0 active would be really confusing.

I assume, then, that as CC0 gets out of its beta stage, the PDD will be
deprecated, preferably with some notice as to why, similar to the old
versions of licenses and licenses that were never upgraded.

-Evan

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature