Comments on: Should we use the CC when it’s not truly freeing? http://iquaid.org/2008/05/14/should-we-use-the-cc-when-its-not-truly-freeing/ ... the four laws of humanity ... Mon, 23 Jan 2012 20:07:59 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: The Grand Fallacy » Two letters too many. http://iquaid.org/2008/05/14/should-we-use-the-cc-when-its-not-truly-freeing/comment-page-1/#comment-2064 The Grand Fallacy » Two letters too many. Tue, 20 May 2008 19:37:17 +0000 http://iquaid.org/?p=81#comment-2064 [...] where due: Karsten Wade blogged about this in his usual prophetic fashion about a week [...] [...] where due: Karsten Wade blogged about this in his usual prophetic fashion about a week [...]

]]> By: Basil Mohamed Gohar http://iquaid.org/2008/05/14/should-we-use-the-cc-when-its-not-truly-freeing/comment-page-1/#comment-2005 Basil Mohamed Gohar Thu, 15 May 2008 17:42:39 +0000 http://iquaid.org/?p=81#comment-2005 I'll prefix this all by saying I have yet to release anything under a CC license simply due to laziness (today I was working on my first piece [lame time-lapse video], actually, that I intend to release under a CC license), however, I think a CC-NC licensed work is far superior to one that is released under full copyright. Granted, it is obviously restricted. However, it is FAR more free to use than a purely copyrighted work. I think the superiority of non-NC licensed works will become apparent once people start seeing their own NC-licensed works missing-out on the great remix culture that abounds with free software & content. But at least if someone releases something, even if it NC-licensed, then it still free to use in purely noncommercial works, which are abundant. Of course, this could also be the start of a legal quagmire...I think we need some guidance on the legal implications of using a NC-licensed work in the gray areas, such as the examples you've mentioned above (if they are even gray...?). I’ll prefix this all by saying I have yet to release anything under a CC license simply due to laziness (today I was working on my first piece [lame time-lapse video], actually, that I intend to release under a CC license), however, I think a CC-NC licensed work is far superior to one that is released under full copyright. Granted, it is obviously restricted. However, it is FAR more free to use than a purely copyrighted work.

I think the superiority of non-NC licensed works will become apparent once people start seeing their own NC-licensed works missing-out on the great remix culture that abounds with free software & content. But at least if someone releases something, even if it NC-licensed, then it still free to use in purely noncommercial works, which are abundant. Of course, this could also be the start of a legal quagmire…I think we need some guidance on the legal implications of using a NC-licensed work in the gray areas, such as the examples you’ve mentioned above (if they are even gray…?).

]]> By: nicu http://iquaid.org/2008/05/14/should-we-use-the-cc-when-its-not-truly-freeing/comment-page-1/#comment-1998 nicu Thu, 15 May 2008 07:32:23 +0000 http://iquaid.org/?p=81#comment-1998 It is indeed frustrating when you search for something to use in a larger project and almost everything you find is unusable: NC-ND, so in the end you just give up searching CC licensed content... I have the feeling that a lot of people use CC licensed mostly because this is the "cool" (the "trendy") thing to do, but in fact they do not want to give up any right, so use the most restrictive version, rendering all the CC tagging as useless. It is indeed frustrating when you search for something to use in a larger project and almost everything you find is unusable: NC-ND, so in the end you just give up searching CC licensed content…

I have the feeling that a lot of people use CC licensed mostly because this is the “cool” (the “trendy”) thing to do, but in fact they do not want to give up any right, so use the most restrictive version, rendering all the CC tagging as useless.

]]>