2010/12/16 Raj Mathur (राज माथुर) <r...@linux-delhi.org>
> On Thursday 16 Dec 2010, Narendra Sisodiya wrote: > > [snip] > > I am not advocating this exact license. I have written that a small > > set of person like to create their content and they want to give in > > such a manner so that > > 1) everybody can be use it for any purpose. > > 2) nobody can take control over it, I mean it should be viral > > copyleft. 3) License should be confusion-less, Any beautiful license > > which has confusion in reusing the content is equal to a close > > restricted copyright notice which restrict you directly. > > > > If you have any license scheme for such person the please share, I > > will blindly follow that. > > CC-SA or CC-BY-SA both meet those requirements. If you're worried about > interoperability, creating another licence isn't the way to approach the > problem. Paraphrasing Tannenbaum: > > The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them, and if > you don't like any of the existing ones you can always create one of > your own. > > > [more snip] > > Creative commons is not a solution. > > Creative Commons has "NC" terms which is useless. People put their > > content in copyleft domain so that other can reuse it. NC is a > > cancer. "SA" is not clear. I like boolean over fuzzy when it comes > > to law.. I like two things > > 1) all right reserved, you cannot do anything > > 2) you can do anything. > > If you're not clear about what SA (Share-Alike) is I suggest you get > someone who understands licensing to explain it to you. All the > scenarios you have mentioned are more than adequately covered by > existing licences. And I don't really think that inability to > understand licences is an incentive to create your own -- quite the > reverse, actually. > > > [yet more snip] > > Exactly, This is the problem. These are never written by remixer. > > Creative Commons Licenses (this term means, I am talking about all > > possible combination of CC) has creative a huge number of license. > > they say, Select whatever license you want , select what ever > > country you want. And this process has divided our content into > > walls. Walls of Creative License, where We (atleast me) do not know > > whether i can reuse it or remix it or not. > > > > you must be on Ibibo maling list on CC, (i am too) and daily you can > > read mail like > > Hey I am doing so, Can i do so... and mail start with INAL and TINLA > > statement and some times long debates like what exaclty is SA. > > Sorry Lawrence Lessig, we just want to live a simple life where we > > want to give away all right in legal manner so that anybody can > > remix/reuse it without any confusion but at the same time license > > must have provision that these freedom must be protected. I think > > Virality is the answer that is why there is a clause which says, > > "any use/reuse of the work must be released under NPDL 1.0 license." > > Or we can says like "changing this license is not allowed" again I > > want a legal advice to do so. > > Ah, I think I get it now. You seem to be under the impression that the > walls between different creations are a result of multiple licences. > Not true. Instead, they are a consequence of different people wanting > their content to be used in different ways. Some people want their > content to carry viral terms (CC-SA & co); some don't care what you do > with their content (public domain); some don't care as long as you don't > use it in a commercial product (CC-NC & co). If your licence can make > all these people think in the same way, more power to it! I have already wrote on this. There is a large category of user and newbies who even do not know what is the license and they exist all around in the world, you can find them on facebook too, all these want a most simple 1 liner license of sharing and remixing. Period. > However, in > my own opinion that is extremely unlikely (I'd say impossible but I'm an > avatar of Napoleon Bonaparte) -- different people have different ideas, > priorities and objectives, and they will need different licences to be > able to express those ideas, priorities and objectives. > > To be short and consequently brutal: your licence only adds more > confusion to the already confusing licensing scenario. My strong > recommendation (which I believe anyone with an iota of licence > experience behind them would concur with) is to withdraw it. > > Regards, > > -- Raj > -- > Raj Mathur r...@kandalaya.org http://kandalaya.org/ > GPG: 78D4 FC67 367F 40E2 0DD5 0FEF C968 D0EF CC68 D17F > PsyTrance & Chill: http://schizoid.in/ || It is the mind that moves > > _______________________________________________ > network mailing list > netw...@lists.fosscom.in > http://lists.fosscom.in/listinfo.cgi/network-fosscom.in > > -- ┌─────────────────────────┐ │ Narendra Sisodiya │ http://narendrasisodiya.com └─────────────────────────┘ _______________________________________________ Ilugd mailing list Ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
