Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Diane Peters <diane AT creativecommons.org>]

Hi Ben,

To the contrary, this is not our intention at all.  The fact that we published BY-NC-SA as the draft for review has nothing to do with a preference for NC licenses over any of the others, and everything to do with the reality that BY-NC-SA contains all the elements of the other 5 licenses.[1]  At this early stage in the process, we felt that publishing one license with all of the elements was better than producing all six given the number of open issues that will need to be carried through to the others. Those on this list who have gone through the porting process are well familiar with the exercise of mechanically building the licenses.

 

That said, it’s true that it could be misinterpreted as such for those who work primarily with BY and BY-SA.   Again, this wasn’t our intention, but I should have made that more clear.  Thanks for calling attention to this.

Diane

[1]  The exceptions are the definition of Creative Commons Compatible License, and including a reference to that in the SA clause.  For details see:  http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0/Draft_1#Provisions_for_other_Licenses_in_the_Suite

On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Ben Finney <bignose+hates-spam AT benfinney.id.au> wrote:

Diane Peters <diane AT creativecommons.org>
writes:

> Thanks for raising this.   As you know, BY-SA is derived from BY-NC-SA
> Draft 1, but with NC provisions removed and the relevant SA-related
> provisions added.

That's rather distressing. Why is the non-free NC clause given such
primacy in the process?

How can we convince you to focus primarily on free-culture licenses,
like CC-BY and CC-BY-SA, and derive the non-free licenses (if people
want them) from those free licenses?

--
 \        “The right to search for truth implies also a duty; one must |
 `\      not conceal any part of what one has recognized to be true.” |
_o__)                                                 —Albert Einstein |
Ben Finney

_______________________________________________
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

-- 
Diane M. Peters, General Counsel
Creative Commons
cell: +1 503-803-8338
skype:  peterspdx
email:diane AT creativecommons.org

http://creativecommons.org/staff#dianepeters

______________________________________

Please note: the contents of this email are not intended to be legal

advice nor should they be relied upon as, or represented to be legal
advice.  Creative Commons cannot and does not give legal advice. You
need to assess the suitability of Creative Commons tools for your
particular situation, which may include obtaining appropriate legal

advice from a licensed attorney.