Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Patrick Peiffer <peiffer.patrick AT gmail.com>]

Hi Jonathon,

As a CC Lead from Luxembourg I have a similar perspective as Paul on this.

If an entity wants to use CC licences but reserve exclusive commercial rights, this is exactly what NC offers and it works as expected. This effect is not to be given up lightly, although it may represent the "dark side" of open licensing to some. Whatever one thinks it is, the yardstick to go by is its effectiveness, simplicity and clarity in reserving exclusive commercial rights. The current NC provision achieves just that. Any extra permissions grafted onto NC must be measured against this initial goal.

The fact that it is NC licences who might end up in court is by no means an argument against NC, it merely shows that NC is solid enough to be used for going to court and AFAIK, has been upheld.

Best regards,

Patrick Peiffer

CC Luxembourg

On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 2:24 AM, jonathon <jonathon.blake AT gmail.com> wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 13/05/12 08:45, Paul Keller wrote:

> The beauty of the current definition of non-commercial is that it is acceptable for a very large number of users.

Is it acceptable to those users because of the rights it protects, or
because of the rights they think it protects?

In some fields of endeavour, the gap between those two groups of rights
is so wide, one would be forgiven for thinking that people were
referring to two different licenses.

> On the other hand the current NC provision has not created any major problems in the wild.

AFAIK, all of the dozen odd court cases relating specifically to
infringement issues, have involved an NC license. (I don't have a list
of those cases, the sticking point that led to going to court, and the
outcome.)

> Given the intensity of the discussions here one would expect that there are frequent conflicts between licensors and licensees of NC
licensed material but that is simply not the case.

a) The survey done by Creative Commons would suggest that the absence of
such conflict is due to potential users deciding that their usage would
be a license violation.

b i) Of the twenty or so forks of the various CC licenses I have seen,
only one of them has not been a fork of the NC license. To me, this
implies that potential NC license users are engaging in license
proliferation, precisely because the NC license does not address their
specific concerns.

b ii) That NC license proliferation basically boils down to three use cases:
* Distribution must be gratis to the recipient;
* Individuals, and non-profits may use the content. It is off limits for
everybody else;
* Content can be used for educational purposes. All other usage is off
limits;

Each of the NC forks I've read has created two or three issues,in an
attempt to nail down the NC part of the license.

jonathon


 * Unknown - detected
 * English

 * English

 <_javascript_:void(0);>

Unable to detect language of selected text.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPsaJPAAoJEFD/SeNs/huZ6VgIAKL1D6eTmtWThrxXi7TkzBsD
YpjTzI8b89cm5lPriBEHex4sffGO/wFM3es+Aly9q6cB3TI+vv4jjbYNfDmh6LX3
OCPnOvp4Fc8cJcH290lSNuOwFcgADt4z1JlO9zSx1TO7sUWX8oTtKXKAk5SiSrr/
WLEo1knvbbxen/w/ZEnbnacjqqOxhoSWt+gwVDlZRcz8PXi/0w/IHofGfkmeEb3F
7nPKpDbgRFmYKAwHQJ/4SGp5ImKTZcydYK8HLARJwucgyVh2iQs2LIeV0RFtpM1j
xtkNr6RGoBXNWNv1jgsi9uWFDcnnanBeo2ggFQqYZ+uFihUwQN5f0lMO4aJjmZI=
=RuSd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
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