Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Maciej Pendolski <beholder0x100 AT gmail.com>]

On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 8:31 PM, Heather Morrison <hgmorris AT sfu.ca> wrote:
> A few thoughts towards the version 4.0 discussions, focusing on 
> noncommercial:
> -       Providing commercial services that support education is a genuine 
> gray area, and one where there may be good reason to have two different 
> licenses. Organizations that rely to some extent on print-on-demand 
> services should be able to say no to this, while many creators who have no 
> interest in bothering with this might want to say sure, go ahead. I 
> strongly advocate for understanding the need for creators to make a living, 
> and including those who share as much as they can while reserving some 
> rights so that they can make a living in the commons. For this reason, I do 
> not support efforts to remove those who choose noncommercial from CC.

My personal preference is for CC-BY-NC-SA in which NC would apply only
to tangible media. So printed books, music CDs, film DVDs, ... could
be only sold by or on behalf of a creator while "virtual" versions of
those (e-books, mp3 files, ...) would be handled pretty much like they
were licenced under CC-BY-SA. I have no idea if this could be
implemented.