If you're interesting in abdicating all rights of/to copyright (using not license at all), I suggest you read up on the Public Domain.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Domain Creative Commons also has a Public Domain dedication process: http://creativecommons.org/license/publicdomain-2?lang=en Would you consider everyone releasing their work under PD "cult-like"? Everyone releasing into PD is just as "weird" a systemization as CC-BY. Just because a particular form of licensing / publishing has a strong following is no reason to abandon it. F On 5/6/07, Matthew Z <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/4/07, Elizabeth Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > (2) We clarified that students keep the copyright to their thesis at > our school. We thought, why not encourage them to license their theses > freely? As such, our repository currently requires that uploaders > agree to license it CC BY, the same license used by PLoS. This is the weird systematization that I'm talking about. Is there actually a choice present to use anything other than "CC BY" or should everyone be sent through the same filter? It's cult-like. What about the choice of not using any licence at all? Matt _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
