Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - [cc-licenses] Attribution: accurate credit should not be forbidden

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Alexander Genaud <alex AT genaud.net>
  • To: cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [cc-licenses] Attribution: accurate credit should not be forbidden
  • Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 21:37:54 -0200

Kim Tucker, right on! CC SA 4.0 would be an honest,
practical and free license attempting to preserve
that same freedom downstream (copyleft). Additionally
CC 4.0 would avoid the embarrassing ambiguity and
legal tap dancing required to both enforce (BY)
and deny (CC0) irrevocable moral rights in the
commons and public domain.


Anthony> If people want to use SA 1.0 (and there aren't
Anthony> that many that do), nothing is stopping them.


Perception is a powerful thing. Indeed it is the basis
for our entire subjective reality. In what way would a
curious or typical individual discover the CC SA 1.0?


Allow modifications of your work?
[Yes, as long as others share alike]

Allow commercial uses of your work?
[Yes]

---> CC BY-SA
(APPROVED FOR Free Cultural Works)


It can easily be argued that attribution as stated in CC BY
and CC BY-SA is almost never intend, neither by consumers
nor producers of content, beyond international moral norms.
The BY clause requires:


Restrictions 4(c)
* keep intact all copyright notices for the Work
* (i) the name of the Original Author
* (ii) the title of the Work
* (iii) the URI .. associated with the Work
* (iv) credit identifying .. the Adaptation


Outside of academic journals, have you EVER seen a BY
work properly cited according to all of 4(c)? Such a beast
is rare indeed. Wikipedia does not properly attribute its
CC BY-SA works.

Does anyone?

Let's be honest. Let's support reality:
CC 4.0 and CC SA 4.0.

Cheers,
Alex

(c) No rights reserved




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page