Opinionated Guide to Creative Commons

Hey everyone,

I had this idea for a work-flow for creative commons, but instead of repeating the same questions as the licenses, I wanted to make the ideas more personal and conceptual.

My opinionated diagram is based on experience working with communities, discussing this issue more times then I could ever want to and attempting to educate and introduce creative commons ideals.

What are your thoughts?

9 thoughts on “Opinionated Guide to Creative Commons

  1. Really nice, Martin. I think a few things could be clearer:

    1) The utility vs artistic distinction isn’t necessary, IMHO

    2) “Do you want to prevent privatization and/or foster a strong community?” is confusing. I know you mean that CC-BY-SA fosters strong community, but I read it as, “Do you want to prevent privatization *and* prevent strong community?”

    I think better would be, “Do you want to foster a strong community, and prevent privatization?”

    3) I’m not sure “privatization” is the best word to describe consequence of non-copyleft. Kinda makes it sound like the problem is when a company (or a person) *owns* the copyright. I think “leaching” might be better… with P2P as popular as it is, I think the terms resonates pretty clearly… “taking without giving back”.

    So I think the best might be, “Do you want to foster a strong community, and prevent leaching?”

    But great work! You’re truly a master of explaining complex things though simple diagrams. 🙂

  2. Hi Martin …. Nice diagram you made there but i have a question to which i didn’t got the answer to from this diagram.

    Is there a license that would alow me to do something like :
    To alow me to require a percentage of the profits someone makes of the use of my work if they ever profit , and if they don’t then i would get nothing and they can use it freely?

  3. Valentin, there is no creative commons license which does that. The reason is that requirements to pay people money and such are more contract terms and I’m guessing that it would be very hard to hold them up in a copyright agreement.

    It’s easier to just do All Rights Reserved and then license your work to interested parties.

    In the open source world we don’t like Non-commercial terms though, so any works you make with NC or ND terms can never be used by Ubuntu or other FOSS projects.

  4. Thank you Mo

    I understand that the open source doesn’t like Non commercial … wheal Non commercial doesn’t sound nice even if you want to use the work in proprietary commercial software because if someone makes a free software he is free to use the work and you would have to pay.

    But i just thought a license that would allow me at least morally to ask for a percentage i don’t know 1%, 10% whatever and still alow the use of my work freely like i would use CC BY would be a great license … and i don’t quite see why someone wouldn’t use such licensed work.
    Thank you Martin

  5. @valentin – Because technically asking for money is outside of the power of a copyright license. I think you’d need concrete terms in a contract. Of course we could always change the laws and I suppose it might not be the same in every country. But enforceability is one of the chief powers of GPL and creative commons.

    The best was, I think, to use Free Culture licenses, is to already have been paid when you publish the work. That way you’re happy when it’s used by others.

  6. @Mo i said morally ask for money … so it wouldn’t give me any legal power. Just to say hey please send something back if you ever turn profitable.
    more like saying hey use it as you wish but please give me something from your profit if not u are an asshole. :))

  7. @Valentin – You can do that outside the license, and then require all distributors to credit you with something like:

    Copyright Valentin 2011, This work is licensed under Creative Commons and hasn’t been paid for. Please consider sharing the wealth.

Comments are closed.