Development of Creative Commons licenses

[drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com>]

On Tue, 8 May 2012 16:48:05 +0200, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis AT pitrou.net>
wrote:
> On Tue, 8 May 2012 09:57:48 -0400
> drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com> wrote:
>> On Tuesday 08 May 2012 01:48:44 Ben Finney wrote:
>> > > Common sense and honesty should be enough to prompt people to disclaim
>> > > when they have changed the spirit of someone else's writings. Not
>> > > everything needs to be formalized in a legal license.
>> >
>> > Defamation law, fraud law, and other similar laws are better positioned
>> > to protect the author's meaning and intent in their work. Copyright is a
>> > poor tool for the job, and as many others have pointed out we have
>> > better tools available.
>>
>> Actually, many of us don't or don't know what we have.
>>
>> Those other laws are certainly the proper tool for the job if they were 
>> well
>> built and maintained.
>>
>> The problem is that in many places copyright law may seem simpler to apply 
>> and
>> able to give a more sure outcome with less effort.
> 
> Why do you think it "may seem simpler to apply"?
> You can say what you want in your license, but that doesn't mean people
> will respect it.

Because, for instance in the case of using BY(-NC)-ND to prevent people
from misrepresenting them in their writings, they just have to sue to
prevent copying and distributing modified copies with no reason given.
They don't have to prove that the modified copies negatively impact
them.

(Assuming no fair use, etc.) I am not saying this makes sense on deep
consideration or experimentation, just that it may seem simpler and more
attractive on the face of it.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Antoine.

all the best,

drew