Development of Creative Commons licenses

[adam <adam AT xs4all.nl>]

hi,



On 06/04/12 21:29, Christopher Allan Webber wrote:
> Your example of open textbooks is a good example of when not providing
> the "source" files is problematic.  However, I can't imagine ways to
> make all the following situations equal:
>
>   - So, the Blender Foundation releases Elephants Dream, and let's assume
>     it's under a CC licenses that does include a source requirement.
>     They do release all the source files.
>     - Someone makes a remix from the .blend files.  Are they obligated to
>       release the source files?
>     - Someone makes a remix from the fully rendered film, a music video
>       or something.  In this case, they never even touched the original
>       .blend files at all, may have not even encountered them.  Are they
>       obligated to release gigabytes of source materials that they never
>       even touched in making their remix?
>   - If I release a PNG, should I have to release my accompanying GIMP or
>     Photoshop files?  Those are the optimal verisons, but what if I
>     didn't keep them?  What also if someone makes a remix... do they also
>     have to distribute my original .xcf files?

I agree with the fact that media is a more problematic issue. The issue 
that remains for me however is that the *idea* of CC derivatives is not 
really worth much unless the licenses actually address the issue of 
source in some way. Licenses could address a source - even if the 
finished artifact itself is deemed in most circumstances by the license 
holder to be the source. Having a named source requirement in the 
license requires the license holder to consider this issue and address 
it - even if their solution is not ideal.

That seems important to me.

adam


> I agree that it's unfortunate that we can have something where someone
> can claim to be an open publshing org and etc and actually not release
> things in a way that's actually easy for people to make derivatives
> from.  But as far as I can tell it's simply too hard to draft legalcode
> that's not incredibly hard to comply with for many cases of users, or
> which ends up being so vague that it ends up being basically useless or
> completely ignored.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>   - Chris
>
> adam<adam AT xs4all.nl>  writes:
>
> > hi,
> >
> > With the new licenses is it possible to ask for the source to be
> > provided in works that are licensed to allow derivatives? I know this
> > issue mainly from the field of books. Now that open publishing (etc) is
> > gaining enormous popularity I see more and more 'open books' made
> > available in PDF only or mobi only formats etc.
> >
> > GPL requires source as a pre-condition for 3 of its 4 freedoms I believe
> > and I think that is for good reason. Derivatives require source. Without
> > source derivatives are not realistic possibilities and PDF or other
> > releases are nothing more than a 'mechanical' form of copyright protection.
> >
> > I would actually like to see a source requirement in ND as well since it
> > is impossible to transcode/transform into other formats sometimes
> > without it. I am guessing that would be a less popular position however.
> >
> > I also understand source doesnt apply to all media equally. However a
> > 'where applicable the source must be provided in a standardised and
> > reusable format' would help matters a lot...
> >
> >
> > adam
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > List info and archives at 
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
> > Unsubscribe at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/cc-licenses
> >
> > In consideration of people subscribed to this list to participate
> > in the CC licenses http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0 development
> > process, please direct unrelated discussions to the cc-community list
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
> _______________________________________________
> List info and archives at 
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
> Unsubscribe at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/cc-licenses
>
> In consideration of people subscribed to this list to participate
> in the CC licenses http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0 development
> process, please direct unrelated discussions to the cc-community list
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community