[Wikimedia-l] Study: Nobody cares about your copyright

John Vandenberg jayvdb at gmail.com
Mon May 28 21:37:13 UTC 2012


On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 5:51 AM, Andrew Gray <andrew.gray at dunelm.org.uk> wrote:
> On Monday, 21 May 2012, Samuel Klein wrote:
>>
>> > O'Reilly is offering works under 14 years (c), thence CC-by
>>
>> Campaign idea: set up a named class of license for friendly groups
>> like O'Reilly that are committing to 14 years, which are defined by
>> terming out in no more than 14 years to CC0 or equivalent PD
>> declarations.
>>
>
> A thought on naming.
>
> The obvious way to badge such a license is through Creative Commons; but
> we've spilled vast amounts of metaphorical ink over "is NC free?" and "is
> ND free?", and one of the results is a good deal of confusion over what a
> "free license" is, what we should campaign for, etc etc etc.
>
> If we throw into the mix *another* license from the same stable, the
> situation gets even more muddled. The inevitable vague descriptions ("this
> work is under a creative commons license" with no definition or link is
> surprisingly common) will encompass a much wider range of use cases - "do
> what you like, just credit me" and "all rights utterly reserved until 2025"
> will be under the same umbrella.
>
> - Andrew.

I'd love to see -NC and -ND dropped from the CC catalog, but I doubt
its going to happen.

It would be nice if -NC and -ND had a time limit on them, after which
the work becomes CC-BY or CC-BY-SA.

--
John Vandenberg



More information about the Wikimedia-l mailing list