On 12/2/07, Gregory Maxwell gmaxwell@gmail.com wrote:
I've proposed alternative terms in the past, basically allowing attribution for collective works (and only collective works) to be cited to any party (for example, Wikimedia's Wikipedia) who meets certain criteria, one of which would be that they provide the entire list of actual contributors. I.e. "For authorship information see XYZ".
Yes, I agree that this approach is preferable, and would support it as an additional option in future CC-BY-SA revisions.
And my first hand experience is different. My experience is Creative Commons will perform actions for the benefit of private parties for the sake of promoting their brand name. You might call this 'addressing stakeholder needs' but I'm not sure I would.
I think you're misinterpreting a bunch of social interactions that may have happened. The world isn't divided into the enemies and supporters of the Truly Good Free Culture Movement. CC's proponents aren't faceless bureaucrats. Larry Lessig, Joi Ito, Jimmy Wales (who is on the CC Board) and others all have their own unique and internally consistent views of how to change the world for the better.
That doesn't mean these are your views, or mine. But recognizing them as valid interpretations of reality is the first step to extending the hand of friendship and working with others. I do believe that, in the vision of the people who run CC, responding to the people who are changing and challenging existing models of cultural production is key to doing their job well. That doesn't mean that they do not understand the reasoning of different communities, or the consequences of particular decisions.
To work with CC means to engage them in a productive dialogue about the future of culture, not to shun them as untrustworthy or unprincipled. Unfortunately, in conflicts like this one, people like yourself often respond by taking an extreme position which is untenable and, ultimately, unsuccessful. The result is that you will not convince others of your beliefs, that you will in fact alienate those who would listen to you, that the "pragmatic" faction will strive to quickly execute theirs, and that the resulting outcome is not the best one possible.
I want to invite you, Greg, to participate in creating the best possible outcome. That will _not_ be the one you _or_ I are currently thinking of. This is not about selling out your beliefs; it's about recognizing that the world out there is different from the world inside your head.