[Commons-l] CC-3.0 and Jimmy's comment on CC-3.0.

[Jimmy Wales]

On Jul 17, 2007, at 1:16 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> I am fairly sure I was told otherwise by Lessig some time ago: that
> the CC-3.0 licenses are designed to increase the ability for authors
> to enforce their moral rights by making the free license grant
> contingent on moral rights being honored.

Egads, no!

> At a minimum, I think Creative Commons needs to make an official
> statement clarifying its intentions. However, this isn't sufficient.
> The intent of the license author is going to have minimal sway in
> court; what will be material is the *exact text*, the understanding of
> the licensee, and the understanding of the licensor.

But the exact text is not problematic at all.  You are  
misunderstanding it.

> Jimmy, I have a lot of trust in your judgment, but I think I need to
> specifically ask you to sit back and consider this subject carefully
> under each of the several hats you wear. You are visionary about the
> importance of content which isn't merely no-cost but which provides
> freedom. You are a board member for the Wikimedia Foundation,
> responsible for its long term well-being. You are an internet
> entrepreneur whose companies profit from content creation communities.
> You are a board member for Creative Commons with the expected
> responsibilities. And you are the father to a child who will inherit
> the social and informational legacy we are all creating.

Of course I agree with all of that, and I am telling you, you are  
misunderstanding the situation here.

--Jimbo