Creative Commons Aotearoa New Zealand discussion

[Matt McGregor <mcgma709 AT gmail.com>]

Timothy Vollmer from CC HQ has a blog post on this issue here:
http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/33874

And if you have a few hours, there's an extremely busy debate on this
in the general Creative Commons community list. The link to the list
archive is here. Scroll 7/8 of the way down:
https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/cc-community/2012-August/thread.html

Cheers,
Matt McGregor

On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Jonathan Hunt
<cc_aotearoa AT huntdesign.co.nz> wrote:
>> From: Danyl Strype <strypey AT disintermedia.net.nz> wrote:
>
>> Kia ora koutou
>>
>> I just read an article published by Students for Free Culture in the
>> USA, advocating for the retirement of the No-Derivatives, and
>> Non-Commercial clauses from the CC license suite:
>> http://freeculture.org/blog/2012/08/27/stop-the-inclusion-of-proprietary-licenses-in-creative-commons-4-0/
>
> (snipped)
>
>> The ND and NC licenses have contributed to a robust global discussion
>> around how copyright can work for everyone in the digital era, and
>> what "free culture" and "free license" really means. They have been a
>> safe paddling pool for people who want to dip their toe into a more
>> open approach to licensing, particularly for institutions who have
>> risk and change aversion written into their legal DNA. However I agree
>> with SFC, NC and ND have done their job, and it's time to put them out
>> to pasture.
>>
>> Keen to hear others' thoughts on these issues.
>
> Thank you for raising this topic Danyl.
>
> I'd be very disappointed in seeing these license options removed. While I'm 
> sympathetic to free culture, there are valid use cases for NC or ND in the 
> spectrum of licensing that CC offers.
>
> A major benefit of CC is the spectrum of license choices that allows one to 
> offer content under standardised licenses with more nuances than All Rights 
> Reserved.
>
> I am a member of, and developer for, the New Zealand Alpine Club. One of 
> our recent projects is a collaborative database of climbing data: 
> http://climbnz.org.nz
> The site content (over 7,000 routes) has been added by volunteers based on 
> previous publications or personal notes, and is licensed as BY-SA-NC.
>
> BY to ensure attribution and a link back to the source.
> SA to encourage sharing of the data around the climbing community.
> NC so that no-one can capture monetary value from the data without 
> consulting with NZAC.
>
> The NZAC is not adverse to people making money on publishing climbing 
> guides but in this case NC was needed to encourage contributions from 
> people who might otherwise try and publish their material under their own 
> name in their own guide, and who don't want to see someone else making 
> money out of the content they have contributed. This way they know that 
> commercial use of the data will only occur with via agreement with NZAC who 
> will aim for arrangements that will benefit the wider climbing community.
>
> If NC was unavailable, and the data was only available under BY-SA, it 
> might discourage such contributors. Without NC, the NZAC might reconsider 
> offering the data under CC and instead define a unique license to suit 
> their situation; that would be a loss to the commons.
>
> It has nothing to do with "dipping toes" and more to do with having 
> standardised options to portray a range of rights. Removing options would 
> make CC less useful, IMHO.
>
> Regards
> Jonathan
>
> Jonathan Hunt
> http://huntdesign.co.nz
> +64 21 529 250
> PO Box 1062, Christchurch 8140, New Zealand
>
> _______________________________________________
> cc-nz mailing list
> cc-nz AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-nz
> Creative Commons Aotearoa New Zealand
> http://www.creativecommons.org.nz/



-- 
Creative Commons Aotearoa New Zealand
Twitter: @cc_aotearoa