goer.org

« In Which Someone Who Wishes to Sue a Video Game Manufacturer Has Something to Teach Us, After All | Main | No Trees Were Harmed In the Writing of This Novel »

Creative Commons

I discovered the other day that Yahoo! has launched a Creative Commons Search. Nifty stuff! I am pleased to note that the goer.org HTML 4.01 Tutorial is currently the #2 result for the search "html tutorial". This despite the fact that the tutorial isn't finished, and was mostly written before I understood the difference between "tags" and "elements". Hmmmm. I think the tutorial could use some spiffing up...

In other Creative Commons-related news: via Tim Bray I discovered a curious statement from Bob Wyman, who claims that the Creative Commons "non-commercial" license does not actually do anything to prevent commercial use. Wyman's reasoning is:

Given the notes on the Creative Commons site, and a closer reading of the Creative Commons licenses themselves, it seems like what is being said by the CC "NonCommercial" license is not that commercial use is denied, but rather that non-commercial use is permitted. The focus is on what is permitted, not what is denied.

First, as far as I can tell, the text of the NonCommercial License explicitly states that commercial usage is prohibited: "Noncommercial. You may not use this work for commercial purposes." Legal jargon is tricky, and designed to trip up non-lawyers and rubes such as ourselves. That said, I am not sure how a "closer reading" would come to some other conclusion.

Second, let's imagine we live in a universe where the NonCommercial license didn't say "you may not use this work for commercial purposes." Let's say it said, "You may use this work for non-commercial purposes" instead. I don't see how this would make any difference. By default, you cannot take my copyrighted material without my permission and use it for either A) non-commercial or B) commercial purposes (modulo fair use and parody considerations). If I then subsequently grant you permission to use some of my copyrighted material for A), that doesn't mean you are suddenly granted permission to use it for B) also. Unless B) is a subset of A). Which it isn't, at least if I understand the English prefix, "non-".

Or am I missing something? I am not a lawyer. Then again, as far as I can tell, neither is Bob. Creative Commons licenses might have other structural problems, but I don't see how this particular issue is one of them.

Posted by Evan Goer on Mar. 25, 2005 at 7:45 PM | Comments (6)

Comments

I think Wyman misses the point. As a copyrighted work, all use (beyond the fair-use exception, yada yada) is prohibited, unless you obtain the permission of the copyright-holder.

The CC License says "Don't ask, just take." Certain uses don't require you to obtain the explicit permission of the copyright holder. For other uses, not covered by the License, you still have to ask.

As a copyright-holder, you ought to be able to permit non-commercial use of your work under a CC NonCommercial license, and then grant licenses for commercial use of your work under terms involving the exchange of green slips of paper.

Posted by Jacques Distler on Mar. 26, 2005 at 8:30 AM
That was my basically my take. Well, it's comforting to know that I'm not crazy. Or -- if I am crazy, then Jacques is too.

Posted by Evan on Mar. 27, 2005 at 8:10 PM
Ummm... I think you mean "...does not do anything to prevent commercial use" and "...explicitly states that commercial usage is prohibited"

Posted by Russ on Mar. 29, 2005 at 3:34 PM
Thanks, Russ. I guess my grasp of the English prefix "non-" is a little shakier than I first thought. I've corrected the error. Also, careful readers will note that the Tim Bray link now actually goes to Tim Bray's site, instead of pointing off into space.

Yes, QA slips once again at goer.org. I knew we should have been more careful about outsourcing...

Posted by Evan on Mar. 29, 2005 at 7:28 PM
I realize I'm about four months late in commenting on this, but Auros just turned me on to your site.

Anyway, I really want to give a big +1 to using source control for binary files. I keep all of my Word and Powerpoint files in CVS, and, sure, I lose diff, but I do get to keep an unlimited number of backups, comments on revisions, branching, and the trivial ability to revert to a former version, all without having a ton of files with cryptic names like Novel1.1.06notdeadyet.doc cluttering up my system.

I'm (sadly) on Windows, but we do have this great program called TortoiseCVS that adds CVS commands to the right-click menu for files (they also make a TortoiseSVN for Subversion). I'm sure OS X has a tasty equivalent.

Posted by Wade on Jul. 28, 2005 at 4:27 PM
OS X actually comes with command line CVS, if you install the "Developer Tools" (XCode + a bunch of other stuff). There are some nice OS X GUIs for CVS available as well.

I hate to think of branching on a novel, though. That's just a scary thought.

Posted by Evan on Jul. 29, 2005 at 12:04 AM

Comment Syntax

The basics:

For a new paragraph, enter two carriage returns.
Plain URLs such as http://www.yahoo.com automatically become links.
The system encodes all angle brackets and ampersands. For example, if you try to enter a HTML paragraph, the system displays the open tag literally as "".

Show advanced syntax

About

This entry was posted on March 25, 2005 by Evan Goer.

For more entries, you can visit the main journal page or browse through the complete archives, which date back to 2001.

Subscribe to this Site

(What does subscribing mean?)

Copyright

Text released under Creative Commons.

To use this license, you must attribute this work properly. This license does not extend to comments unless the original poster of that comment states otherwise.

Home | About | Journal | HTML Tutorial