[Commons-l] CC by 3.0 not allowed on Commons?

[cohesion]

On 7/13/07, Joichi Ito <jito at neoteny.com> wrote:
> Yes. As the chairman of CC I would disagree that 3.0 is non-free. ;-)

It does seem very clear from the text that it requires what we're
referring to as moral rights. I am not a lawyer but even the unported
version,

"Except as otherwise agreed in writing by the Licensor or as may be
otherwise permitted by applicable law, if You Reproduce, Distribute or
Publicly Perform the Work either by itself or as part of any
Adaptations or Collections, You must not distort, mutilate, modify or
take other derogatory action in relation to the Work which would be
prejudicial to the Original Author's honor or reputation."

Sounds a little weird to me. I actually had my blog using creative
commons since 1.0 but took it off because I don't want to limit people
like this. I know some people say it's not real or it's not limiting
but I haven't heard a good explanation. Why isn't it? Is "may be
otherwise permitted by applicable law" a magic phrase that says some
people can disregard the whole sentence? Geni isn't alone in this,
it's obviously the consensus view on commons right now, but even
outside wikipedia it is an issue that I think the creative commons
should help clear up for us all, please! :D

Judson
[[:en:User:Cohesion]]