Development of Creative Commons licenses

[heba <mat.r.gl AT gmail.com>]

for me it's impossible what you ask. 
A contract is effective only all parties involved are known.
So you can't have a contract from you ad your employer, where either is anonymous. The contract in this case is not effective.
The same is a license, proprietary or not, is a contract. So if one of two contractors is anonymous the contract is not effective.
As regards pseudonyms, there are many problems:

a) who knows the real person that is under a pseudonym? all is correct when there is a publisher, but when the author is free to all publishing?

b) and if your pseudonym is a name really existing? Take my nick name in this e-mail. Heba is my nick name and pseudonym, but heba is a real name, in Russian is a male name in Arabic is a female name, million of people use Heba, how you can see who is really Heba even if you did not write my name inside of my publications?

If you wnat use a pseudonym, you can do this, as me in all my pubblication:

in the front cover use the pseudonym, but in the book explain that your pseudonym is that person and no one else. So for me  heba is the author but in my book, or paper or other is express that Heba is Micaela Gallerini, that she is a programmer and the blog where found not only the book, but all her work, therefore I am recognizable.

Authorize license with pseudonym or anonyumous is a legal mistake, becouse who must take the right of the publication? and there is and last problem for me. And if I wirte something that can send to prison or to death someone else in other part of the world?
I understand that someone have not coscience but I pass, for me it's respect for other people, even if I don't know them...(highly personal opinion).

-- 
Micaela Gallerini (a.k.a. heba)

2012/8/9 Francesco Poli <invernomuto AT paranoici.org>

Hello everybody,
Section 3(a)(1)(A) of CC-by-sa-v4.0draft2 states:

[...]
>          (A) identify the author(s) of the Work as well as other
>          parties designated by Licensor to receive attribution in the
>          manner designated by Licensor,
[...]

This clause may pose problems with anonymous or pseudonymous works.
I think that the clause should explicitly mention the possibility that
the author is to be "identified" through a pseudonym or through the
word "anonymous".

Maybe the clause could say:

| (A) identify the name or the pseudonym of the author(s) of the
| Work, when supplied, as well as other parties designated by
| Licensor to receive attribution in the manner designated by
| Licensor,

I hope this suggestion may be implemented in the next draft.

N.B.: please note that this is a regression with respect to draft1.


--
 http://www.inventati.org/frx/frx-gpg-key-transition-2010.txt
 New GnuPG key, see the transition document!
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82  3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE

_______________________________________________
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