Danyl Strype

Sunday 24 August 2008 2:35:03 am

Arguments against 'non-commercial' licensing

Kia ora koutou

These blog entries challenge the Non-Commerical (NC) option in CC licenses.
http://www.robmyers.org/weblog/20...rmission-culture-simply-doesnt-work/
http://robmyers.org/weblog/2008/0...mmercial-sharealike-is-not-copyleft/

It argues that as well as causing some of the same practical headaches as All-Rights-Reserved copyright, licenses that include NC (and No-Derivus - ND) are 'non-free', in the sense of an interpretation of the four freedoms of the Free Software Definition, as applied to text (where text includes written word, spoken word, music, video etc), which is laid out in the Free Cultural Objects Definition...
http://freedomdefined.org/Definition

...and in the Libre Knowledge statement...
http://communities.libre.org/

...and the Open Knowledge Definition:
http://www.opendefinition.org/

Here's an essay on why the term 'Libre' (of Free) Knowledge is preferred to 'Open'...
http://communities.libre.org/philosophy/saylibre

...and whether is should be Free Content, Expression, Cultural Object etc
http://freedomdefined.org/Which_name_should_you_use%3F

This helpful article helps to distinguish between 'free non-copyleft', 'free-copyleft' and 'non-free' CC licenses, and the proportion of each kind that make up the total adoption of CC licenses:
http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.c...art_and_the_creative_commons_culture

Finally, some artists may be interested in having a look at the Free Art License:
http://artlibre.org/licence/lal/en/

RnB
Strypey