Tuesday, December 24, 2002

on the permanence of cc licenses. There's a wonderfully careful analysis of various CC issues at burningbird. Thank you. One point to clarify, however. CC licenses are, at this moment, at least, permanent, in the sense that the term is as long as copyright runs (and we'll see whether that's permanent or not soon enough). That issue was a tough one for us (I, of course, favor "limited terms"), and we're eager for feedback on that issue. But just because you can't revoke a particular license doesn't mean you can't revoke the offer. If, for example, you offer content under a CC license for a month, and then change your mind, you can stop offering the content under that license. Anyone who accepted your offer while it was valid, of course, has a deal. But no one after you withdraw the offer can accept anymore. Finally, my blog is licensed in the xml. Button coming soon. [source: Lessig Blog] complex law, simple code. I missed a string of comments about CC licenses and software. Shelley raises some great questions. Here's the problem. We're trying to develop tools to enable people to express their preferences as simply as possible. We can't do much to make the underlying law simple. I've tried to answer some of the questions in the extended entry. But I'm afraid Shelley will be right again: The answers will only raise more questions. There's lots here to work out, and we can't do all the working out. [source: Lessig Blog] Creative Commons License. Over the weekend, I added a Creative Commons license to this weblog, removing the earlier copyright notice with "all rights reserved". I chose the Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial 1.0 license -- as have Denise Howell and Jon Udell, among others. Denise's logic made particular sense and stimulated me to take action. [Tnx: Dave Winer's Scripting News for the original pointer to Denise's work] [source: Scott Loftesness] 5:34:18 AM

© Copyright 2006 Russ Savage. Last update: 5/8/06; 8:54:03 PM.