Re: Creative Commons 4.0 BY-NC-SA draft available
<quote name="Christofer C. Bell" date="2012-04-09" time="15:02:37 -0500">
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 12:17 PM, Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> wrote:
> > Sadly Creative Commons are still peddling non-free licenses :(
> >
> > https://lwn.net/Articles/490202/
>
> Why do you find this sad? There are licenses needed for things other
> than free software.
Some common reasons people are sad that CC 'peddles' non-free licenses
are:
* it confuses the important distinction between things that are Free
and things that are not. Especially so when someone just says:
"available under a CC license" and does not specific which (this
happens more often than many realize).
* something that is supposedly promoting the commons so that we can all
build on each other's creativity and research (see: all videos CC has
ever produced) confuses a real commons and that where things can only
be consumed but not interacted with.
* it encourages people to continue to adopt non-Free licenses in cases
where they would otherwise choose a Free one. When big-name artists
choose a NonCommercial ShareAlike license (eg: NIN) other artists
think "if it worked for Trent, it'll work for me!"
* This is related to the "people will always feel more comfortable
when sharing something if they can share it in a non-Free way"
argument.
Also, saying "there are licenses needed for things other than free
software" also confuses the issue a bit. Freedom is not about
software-only things. And that sentence confuses the type of media with
the freedom-ness of the media. There is no reason (that I can see,
personally) why a song shouldn't be as Free as a software application.
Greg
--
| Greg Grossmeier GPG: B2FA 27B1 F7EB D327 6B8E |
| http://grossmeier.net A18D 1138 8E47 FAC8 1C7D |
Reply to: