Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Mike Linksvayer <ml AT creativecommons.org>]

I'm forwarding (with permission) an email exchange I had last year
with Mathieu Paapst, who has actually used a time-based switch to more
freedoms (unmitigated copyright to CC-BY after 2 years). This
demonstrates that I have poor memory, but am prone to say similar
things given right cues; more importantly it provides a bit of the
evidence of existing practice/experimentation I was requesting.

Mathieu's implementation did not require any support in the CC
licenses themselves, but maybe it would somehow inform whether such
support is warranted in 4.0 and if so what form it ought take and
whether time-based switches to more freedom is something CC (the
organization/website tools) and/or the broader community ought
encourage, eg in lieu of licenses that never offer more than a little
bit of freedom (if latter obviously extended discussion would be
better on cc-community).

I've added a very brief summary of a few of the options discussed on
this list to
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0/Sandbox#Time-based_switch_to_more_freedom
-- feel free to add and correct.

Thanks (especially to Mathieu),
Mike


---------- Forwarded message ----------
 From: Mathieu Paapst <m.h.paapst AT rug.nl>
Date: Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 4:10 PM
Subject: Re: time limited licenses
To: Mike Linksvayer <ml AT creativecommons.org>


Hi Mike,

I think it might be a good idea to send that discussion to the list.

I am not aware of any real discussion in Dutch about this topic. After
i introduced it a few other authors replied on a blog or on twitter
saying it is a good idea, combining the old businessmodel with
something new. No negative reactions, so obviously no discussion.
After that introduction i have not been involved in promoting the
idea, basically because i have been too busy writing my pdh.

Kind regards and merry christmas to you,

Mathieu



Op 23 dec. 2011 om 17:05 heeft Mike Linksvayer
<ml AT creativecommons.org> het volgende geschreven:

> Hi Mathieu,
>
> Many thanks for the reminder (I see last in thread was me a little
> more than a year ago saying bug me in a year; obviously I really
> needed it :-\). Do you mind if I send our previous discussion to the
> list?
>
> http://rechten.eldoc.ub.rug.nl/FILES/root/2010/werkenau/boek_werkgever_en_auteursrecht.pdf
> is the book you referred to, right?
>
> I see some hits for "Time switch licentie" in Dutch. Is there any
> discussion of the idea worth taking a look at via autotranslation?
>
> Many thanks again, with an appropriate measure of embarrassment,
> Mike
>
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 12:58 AM, Mathieu Paapst <M.H.Paapst AT rug.nl> wrote:
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>> I see a discussion about time limited licenses (and Founders copyright) has
>> come up on the CC mail list. This reminded me of a discussion the two of us
>> had in august 2010. I needed you can see below to refresh your memory ;-)
>>
>> Just to update you I wanted to let you know that my book has sold well and
>> that I am happy with the way the timed license has been implemented. In one
>> year time it will automatically become CC-By.  Now also other Dutch authors
>> (eg. http://technologybarrier.wordpress.com/jan-stedehouder/)  have decided
>> to use the "Time switch license" for some of  their forthcoming books, so i
>> guess this idea might very well be appealing to authors.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Mathieu
>>
>> mr. M.H.Paapst
>>
>> Rijksuniversiteit Groningen
>> Centrum voor Recht en ICT (Center for Law and IT)
>> Oude Kijk in t Jat straat 5/9
>> 9712 EA Groningen
>>
>> 050-3635433
>>
>>
>> On 23-8-2010 19:12, Mike Linksvayer wrote:
>>
>> Hi Mathieu,
>>
>> Thanks for the thoughts and especially your concrete example. I will see
>> what others think internally about the legal and technical feasibility 
>> given
>> current environment. Feel free to bother me later in the year about
>> progress, and let me know how your implementation of this idea is received.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 6:30 AM, Mathieu Paapst <M.H.Paapst AT rug.nl> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Mike,
>>>
>>> * Added complexity always has costs (a variety of them in this case)
>>>
>>> I agree, but surely this is not the number one reason for a decision not
>>> to pursue this idea.
>>>
>>> * Some works that otherwise would be licensed now, would instead be
>>> licensed in future
>>>
>>> I am not sure if this is a usefull argument because the opposite is also
>>> true: some works that otherwise would never be licensed, would instead
>>> be licensed under CC in the near future. I am not familiar with any
>>> research that would support your or my argument, however it would be
>>> very interesting to actually research this topic. What are your ideas on
>>> this?
>>>
>>> * Present value of works licensed in the future relatively low (that's
>>> why (c) extension doesn't make policy sense, from an economic
>>> perspective, though obviously not as much of a problem if only a few
>>> years in future)
>>>
>>> I agree. I think this argument actually supports the idea of the timed
>>> CC release, because most works (even bestsellers) indeed loose value a
>>> few years (and sometimes quicker!) after their release. This means that
>>> a publisher or author in most cases will not be able to make serious
>>> money after a few years. At that point 3 things can happen:
>>> 1) They decide to release the work under a CC license. People who
>>> already bought the works in recent years will probably not know about
>>> that decision and they will not benefit from it.  Also the work has not
>>> been licensed to them under CC.
>>> 2) They don't want to go through all that trouble and decide to do
>>> nothing. The works stay "locked in"  by copyright for at least 70 years
>>> (in Europe).
>>> 3) The works automatically falls under a CC license on a certain date.
>>> I think at the moment most publishers and authors still go for option 2.
>>> This is the worst option IMO.
>>>
>>> * Nobody that I know of has done on their own, nor third party service
>>> facilitated, either of which would demonstrate demand -- and there's
>>> nothing in theory preventing either
>>>
>>> Someone has to be first ;-) I used the method for my new book (in Dutch)
>>> on "employers copyright". isbn 978-90-367-4472-0   I have asked some
>>> other writers what they think of this method and have gotten positive
>>> feedback. The reason why they haven't used it before is simple: because
>>> of a lack of knowledge they always assumed there is only the choice for
>>> or against using CC, and nothing in between.  You also have to keep in
>>> mind that until now no one is promoting the timed release method to
>>> publishers and authors.
>>>
>>> * Timed release has not been successful in software world -- most
>>> prominent example, Ghostscript, stopped a few years ago -- though
>>> there's at least one reason to believe it would be less useless for
>>> non-versioned works
>>>
>>> Indeed, timed release could be more successful in the content world. For
>>> my book i have a very simple businesscase. We have invested time and
>>> some money to create the book. For me and my publisher the only way to
>>> get investment back and make some money is by selling at least 200
>>> copies of the book. Based on the sellings of previous books (around 250)
>>> we think this will take between one and two years.  After that period
>>> there will probably be a new book and no need to still make some small
>>> money and keep the old one protected for 70 years after i died.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Mathieu.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Mike Linksvayer wrote:
>>>> Hi Mathieu,
>>>>
>>>> The idea has been brought up semi-regularly through CC's history. We
>>>> haven't pursued because:
>>>> * Added complexity always has costs (a variety of them in this case)
>>>> * Some works that otherwise would be licensed now, would instead be
>>>> licensed in future
>>>> * Present value of works licensed in the future relatively low (that's
>>>> why (c) extension doesn't make policy sense, from an economic
>>>> perspective, though obviously not as much of a problem if only a few
>>>> years in future)
>>>> * Nobody that I know of has done on their own, nor third party service
>>>> facilitated, either of which would demonstrate demand -- and there's
>>>> nothing in theory preventing either
>>>> * Timed release has not been successful in software world -- most
>>>> prominent example, Ghostscript, stopped a few years ago -- though
>>>> there's at least one reason to believe it would be less useless for
>>>> non-versioned works
>>>>
>>>> Could you say more about your usecase? Sometimes recurrent ideas like
>>>> this eventually have their right time...
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Mike
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 8:33 AM, Mathieu Paapst <M.H.Paapst AT rug.nl
>>>> <mailto:M.H.Paapst AT rug.nl>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>     Hello Mike,
>>>>
>>>>     For many years i have been a fan of the CC licenses, using them on
>>>>     most
>>>>     of my works and promoting them to publishers, authors and my
>>>> employer
>>>>     the university of Groningen (the Netherlands).  During those years I
>>>>     encountered the problem that some publishers actually do like to
>>>>     idea of
>>>>     open content and maybe see the advantages of it, but are also scared
>>>>     that they will not make any money on the books by giving it away for
>>>>     free. Sadly in most cases they decide to not use the CC licenses. I
>>>>     wanted to solv this problem because i dont think it is fair to say
>>>>     to a
>>>>     publisher or author "oh well, you just have to change your
>>>>     businessmodel" and then not give them an alternative model.  This
>>>>     is why
>>>>     I came up (I havent seen it before) with the following CC+  idea
>>>>     for my
>>>>     recent book:
>>>>     Time switch-CC is a very short licensetext, that combines the open
>>>>     content/access model with the traditional businessmodel for
>>>>     bookpublishers. The text lets everybody know until what particular
>>>>     date
>>>>     all copyrights are reserved by the author. This gives the
>>>>     author/publisher of a book the possibility to earn money the
>>>>     traditional
>>>>     way during a fixed period of time.  After this period the work
>>>>     automatically falls free under a pre-chosen Creative commons
>>>> license.
>>>>
>>>>     The text i used in my book is the following, where the bold parts
>>>> can
>>>>     actually be changed to fit the need of the author or the
>>>>     bookpublisher:
>>>>
>>>>     /TS*0113/CC-BY*
>>>>     All rights are reserved until *January 2013*.
>>>>     After that date the following license applies:/ /*Creative Commons,
>>>>     Attribution (By) 3.0*/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     Ofcourse I know some in the open community will regard this as
>>>> "second
>>>>     best", however i think it can do more good than harm.  Do you
>>>>     think this
>>>>     might be a concept that can be further explored by your
>>>> organization?
>>>>
>>>>     Best regards,
>>>>
>>>>     Mathieu Paapst