cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses
List archive
Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved": please don't!
- From: drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com>
- To: Development of Creative Commons licenses <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved": please don't!
- Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 11:24:10 -0400
On Monday 16 April 2012 18:20:57 Heather Morrison wrote:
> For Drew:
>
> Allowing noncommercial uses is different from reserving commercial rights.
Perhaps it should be and in some realms is, but I have been assured that in
the copyright laws we are dealing with and the licenses as drafted, it is
not.
If you put an NC on a work, I assume you are a person wanting all the money
for yourself. There is no promise at all in an NC license (much less a
binding promise) that you will not be using the work for commercial purposes.
There is only a restriction on my that I may not do so.
This puts you in a very privileged position with respect to me and is hardly
conducive to a commons in my view.
BY-SA on the other hand puts us on a much more equal footing. We can both be
commercial or not as we choose.
But cc has no license which prevents commercial use by all involved.
> For example, a creator may have no intention of commercializing a work, but
> rather wish to express that a work does not belong to the realm of things
> to be commercialized.
I can see the need and desireability for this myself, but cc does not
currently have a license for that and when I have broached it years ago,
there seemed no interest at all and even disdain on the part of some list
members.
>
> >From a technical / legal standpoint, this may be difficult if not
> > impossible to distinguish from "commercial rights reserved". From the
> > perspective of expressing what a creator wishes to share, however, there
> > can be a world of difference. From my viewpoint, if CC were to force a
> > choice between "commercial rights reserved" and no reserving commercial
> > rights, then CC becomes all about commercialization, which to me is not
> > at all the vision of the commons. This reinforces an unfortunate tendency
> > in our society to see everything in commodity terms. For this reason, a
> > CC with no noncommercial and "commercial rights reserved" would be
> > something to avoid.
>
> It would be good to have a have positive statement than "noncommercial",
> but I'm not sure what to suggest. For me, "commons" is what this should be
> (someday).
>
> best,
>
> Heather Morrison
all the best,
drew
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved"
, (continued)
- Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved", Mathias Schindler, 04/13/2012
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved",
Frances Pinter, 04/13/2012
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved",
Heather Morrison, 04/13/2012
- Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved", Frances Pinter, 04/13/2012
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved",
Gregor Hagedorn, 04/13/2012
- Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved", Gregory Maxwell, 04/13/2012
- Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved", David Chart, 04/13/2012
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved",
zotz, 04/16/2012
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved": please don't!,
Heather Morrison, 04/16/2012
- Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved": please don't!, Gregor Hagedorn, 04/17/2012
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved": please don't!,
drew Roberts, 04/17/2012
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved": please don't!,
Heather Morrison, 04/17/2012
- Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved": please don't!, Francesco Poli, 04/18/2012
- Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved": please don't!, zotz, 04/23/2012
- Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved": please don't!, Anthony, 04/24/2012
- Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved": please don't!, drew Roberts, 04/24/2012
- Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved": please don't!, Anthony, 04/24/2012
- Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved": please don't!, drew Roberts, 04/24/2012
- Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved": please don't!, Anthony, 04/24/2012
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved": please don't!,
Heather Morrison, 04/17/2012
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved": please don't!,
Heather Morrison, 04/16/2012
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Version 4:0:Rebranding "noncommercial" to "commercial rights reserved",
Heather Morrison, 04/13/2012
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.