On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 5:51 AM, Andrew Gray <[email protected]> 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 _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
