Development of Creative Commons licenses

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

On Monday 27 August 2012 06:04:54 Mathias Schindler wrote:
> 2012/8/26 Anthony <osm AT inbox.org>:
> > [quote]
> > Termination
> > Treatment in 4.0d2: Remains unchanged, with automatic termination
> > still applying in the event license conditions are violated. However,
> > this remains an open item for discussion between d2 and d3, as we
> > explore more concertedly the inclusion of a cure period or similar
> > provision more in line with those found in the MPL 2.0 and Gnu GPL
> > 3.0.
> > [/quote]
> >
> > Are there any arguments against the inclusion of a cure period or
> > similar provision?  I think this is important.
> >
> > CCing the Wikimedia mailing list, as automatic termination upon a
> > minor breach would likely have a large impact on Wikimedia projects.
>
> A violation of the Creative Commons license terms results in the
> termination of usage rights. Introducing a cure period would add
> another layer of complexity in case a rights holder chooses to enforce
> those license terms. Since curing is not ruled out in the current
> wording, I recommend in favor of keeping the current wording.

Just to be clear, I think the thought is that the license would still be 
revoked on violation. There would just be specified steps and a time period 
for re-institution.

Do you not care of the damage that can be done to the innocent infringer who 
can never again get a license to the work if the copyright holder wants to be 
a pain?
>
> Mathias Schindler

all the best,

drew