Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Björn Terelius <bjorn.terelius AT gmail.com>]

Hi

I would prefer not allowing redistribution of the work under later 
versions of the license, as there is no *guatantee* that the later 
versions will preserve the original intention. For example, there are 
some people on this list who think that the NC and ND options should be 
dropped from future licenses. In principle, they could redefine CC 
BY-SA-NC-ND to mean CC BY-SA in future versions of the license. While I 
personally trust the CC community not to do this, I can easily imagine 
people being new to CC who are put off by the fact that the license 
terms could be changed without their consent.

Best wishes
Bjorn Terelius

Jessica Coates wrote:
> Hi
>
> <...>
>
> Also - it's been pointed out that our proposed language for how you can 
> distribute the original work (ie under the same CC licence, a later version, 
> or the same licence from another jurisdiction) actually goes much further 
> than the Unported text, which just says:
>
> "You may Distribute or Publicly Perform the Work only under the terms of this 
> License."
>
> What do people think? Should we roll our language back in line with the 
> Unported, or is the forward and cross-jurisdiction compatibility implied/a 
> good thing?
>
>
> Jessica Coates
> Project Manager
> Creative Commons Clinic
> Queensland University of Technology
>
> ph: 07 3138 8301
> fax: 07 3138 9598
> email: j2.coates AT qut.edu.au
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>