Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Heather Morrison <hgmorris AT sfu.ca>]

Thanks very much to Diane Peters & the CC team on the draft CC-BY-NC- 
SA. Good work, I appreciate the background provided, and the continued  
support for NC.

I would like to propose a change in the definition of "noncommercial".  
Currently, this reads:

(f) NonCommercial means not primarily intended for or directed towards  
commercial advantage or private monetary compensation. For purposes of  
this Public License, the exchange of the Licensed Work by digital file- 
sharing or similar means is NonCommercial provided there is no payment  
of monetary compensation in connection with the exchange.

suggested change to:

(f) NonCommercial means not intended for re-sale or re-use of the  
Licensed Work for private monetary compensation (for example, as a  
means to attract advertising revenue). For purposes of this Public  
License, the exchange of the Licensed Work by digital file-sharing or  
similar means is NonCommercial provided there is no payment of  
monetary compensation in connection with the exchange. For the  
avoidance of doubt, educational use - teaching and learning - is  
Noncommercial, and permitted by this Public License, while including  
the content in a package intended for sale to educational institutions  
for profit is Commercial, and prohibited by this Public License.

Web-based or other discovery services that rely on advertising  
revenue, such as search engines, may use advertising IN CONNECTION  
WITH THEIR SERVICES in connecting searchers to this content; this does  
not constitute commercial use of the content. Advertising that  
constitutes exploitation of the content for commercial purposes, such  
as advertising inserted into a derivative, advertising that readers  
are forced to watch before viewing the content, creating the  
impression of sponsorship, or advertising that implies that the  
creator endorses the advertised product, constitutes commercial use  
and is prohibited by this license.

Background:

After re-reading the Executive Summary of the Defining Noncommercial  
report, it strikes me that part of the problem with the overly broad  
definition of noncommercial stems from lack of understanding of  
copyright by most of the population (as noted in this report). The  
idea that you cannot use a work if what you are doing is commercial in  
nature, from my perspective, suggests that copyright is not just about  
expression of ideas, but rather about ideas themselves. I think this  
sets a bad precedent, and it would be a good idea for Creative Commons  
to steer away from this.

best,

Heather Morrison
hgmorris AT sfu.ca