My little brain needs some help. If I distributed soemthing as a CC-BY-
SA and somebody translated that work to Chinese wouldn't they be in
violation of the CC-BY-SA license by selling it?

China does seem to support the CC-BY-SA, then of course I can't read
Chinese so maybe Mainland China treats a CC-BY-SA differently.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/cn/

On May 30, 7:58 am, Stephen Downes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hiya
>
> Just as an addendum, since you ask,> Still not sure I understand the meaning 
> of NC , and why NC is not good
> > for free content ?
>
> This is a good example of why, in my view, the NC license is more 'free'
> for content.
>
> Suppose OCW is licensed to allow commercial use. Some company comes
> along and spends a lot of money to translate the materials into Chinese.
> Then, in order to recover their investment, they sell the materials in
> China.
>
> The result?
>
> - this remains the only translation into Chinese, since people say there
> is 'no point' translating the materials a second time
> - hence, for Chinese speakers, the *only* access to these materials is
> through purchase
>
> I would add that if there is any danger of people producing free Chinese
> versions of the materials, such a company would have a significant
> incentive to block that effort. Such efforts are blocked in numerous ways:
>
> - the company will 'lock down' the content it distributed (in., eg.,
> proprietary formats, such as is used by the Kindle) so people can't
> simply copy it
> - the company would raise doubts about the quality of the free translation
> - the company would obtain exclusive distributorship of the material in
> Chinese markets, such as universities
> - questions would be raised about the legality of the free translation
> - if officials can be bribed, the people doing the free translation can
> be harassed or imprisoned
> - technical requirements (such as standards compliance, or content
> registration, or digital rights enforcement) can be imposed on all
> content, which only the commercial company can afford
>
> I could go on at length.
>
> The end result is, if content is licensed under 'CC-BY-SA', the result
> is inevitably that the majority of people in the world must pay for
> access to that content. And that is not what I call 'free'.
>
> -- Stephen
>
>
>
>
>
> > Thank you
>
> > Leo
>
> > 2008/5/30 Stephen Downes <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>:
>
> >     Hiya,
>
> >     > MIT's OCW materials use the NC restriction and therefore do not
> >     qualify as free content under the free cultural works definition. The
> >     access may be open -- but they are certainly not free materials :-)
>
> >     This is written as though it is a simple fait accompli. But there
> >     is a significant body of opinion (at least, to me) that says that
> >     materials may be 'free' and licensed as 'n on-commercial' -- and
> >     indeed, that when materials are used commercially (eg., sold) they
> >     are by definition *not* free.
>
> >     -- Stephen
>
> >     Wong Leo wrote:
> >>     Dear Wayne , could you please explain to me more about these NC
> >>     rules I am confused
>
> >>     why MIT use it
>
> >>     what is the difference ?
>
> >>     Leo thank you
>
> >>     2008/4/9 mackiwg <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>:
>
> >>         A quick observation --
>
> >>         MIT's OCW materials use the NC restriction and therefore do not
> >>         qualify as free content under the free cultural works
> >>         definition. The
> >>         access may be open -- but they are certainly not free
> >>         materials :-)
>
> >>         Visit the CC site to see which licenses are approved as free
> >>         cultural
> >>         works.
>
> >>         Fortunately WE and the Wikimedia foundation projects have
> >>         been smart
> >>         enough to use free content licenses!
>
> >>         Cheers
> >>         Wayne
>
> >>         On Mar 30, 5:51 am, James Neill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>         <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> >>         > MIT, Elsevier Offer Free Content From More Than 2,000
> >>         
> >> Journalshttp://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/web/about/media/elsevier_announce/elsevier_.
> >>         
> >> <http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/web/about/media/elsevier_announce/elsevier_.>..
>
> >>         > CAMBRIDGE, Mass., Mar. 7, 2008 - In a move to encourage
> >>         open education,
> >>         > MIT OpenCourseWare (OCW) and Elsevier have agreed to make
> >>         available
> >>         > figures and text selections from any of Elsevier's more
> >>         than 2,000
> >>         > journal titles for use on OCW.
>
> >>         > As a result of this landmark agreement, select Elsevier
> >>         content can now
> >>         > be included within the open access OCW course materials -
> >>         to be freely
> >>         > downloaded, used and shared under a Creative Commons
> >>         license. The
> >>         > Elsevier content includes up to three figures (including
> >>         tables and
> >>         > illustrations) per individual article (or ten per journal
> >>         volume) and up
> >>         > to 100 words from a single text extract (or 300 words from
> >>         a series of
> >>         > extracts).
>
> >>     --
> >>     blog:http://leolaoshi.yo2.cn
> >>     HELP项目https://groups.google.com/group/helpelephantsliveproject
>
> > --
> > blog:http://leolaoshi.yo2.cn
> > HELP项目https://groups.google.com/group/helpelephantsliveproject- Hide quoted 
> > text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "WikiEducator" group.
To visit wikieducator, go to: http://www.wikieducator.org
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to