Creative Commons - User contributions [en]

User:Kt

2012-03-15T19:16:25Z

Kt:

'''About me''': [http://wikieducator.org/User:KTucker my user page on WikiEducator].

'''Contact''': [[Special:EmailUser/kt|Email me]]

'''Mission''': pro-freedom

'''License(s) of interest''':

* [[4.0/ShareAlike|ShareAlike]] - arguing to reinstate ShareAlike ([http://creativecommons.org/licenses/sa/1.0/ 1.0] to 4.0).

See:

* [http://wikieducator.org/Libre_Puro_License Libre Puro License] (debugging advice for this draft will be most welcome :-)
** [http://wikieducator.org/Libre_License#Preamble_for_the_Libre_Puro_License Preamble]
** [http://wikieducator.org/Libre_License_Draft_Creative_Commons_Deed License deed]
* [http://wikieducator.org/Declaration_on_libre_knowledge Declaration on libre knowledge]
* [http://wikieducator.org/Say_Libre Say Libre]
* [http://wikieducator.org/Libre_knowledge Libre knowledge]

Talk:4.0/NonCommercial

2012-02-29T09:56:59Z

Kt: A belated note on SA - BY-NC-SA and BY-SA are very different (the first perpetuates an author imposed restriction the other perpetuates freedom for society)

== Explaining my edits ==
Hi folks,

I split the first proposal because it described what it was doing as 'clarifying' the NC definition, but its example was actually changing the NC definition so something now considered NC would become commercial (specifically not-for-profit filesharing). If you think that's pedantry, feel free to roll them back into one proposal - I don't support either, I just wanted the language to be crystal clear.

--[[User:Sanglorian|Sanglorian]] 08:38, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

==BY NC SA and BY SA==

Apologies for my absence ([[User:Kt|K]] 09:56, 29 February 2012 (UTC)). Just in case [[Talk:4.0/ShareAlike|this]] regarding ShareAlike is still relevant in the NC discussion:
Does it make sense to discuss "ShareAlike" generically? Why not?

:: e.g. CC-BY-SA is conceptually very different from CC-BY-NC-SA.
:: CC-BY-SA is pro-freedom for society.
:: CC-BY-NC-SA is pro-choice on behalf of authors - including the choice to impose restrictions on readers.

User:Kt

2011-12-11T01:06:37Z

Kt:

'''About me''': [http://wikieducator.org/User:KTucker my user page on WikiEducator].

'''Contact''': [[Special:EmailUser/kt|Email me]]

'''Mission''': pro-freedom

'''License(s) of interest''':

* [[4.0/ShareAlike|ShareAlike]] - arguing to reinstate ShareAlike ([http://creativecommons.org/licenses/sa/1.0/ 1.0] to 4.0).

See:

* [http://wikieducator.org/Libre_Puro_License Libre Puro License] (draft)
** [http://wikieducator.org/Libre_License#Preamble_for_the_Libre_Puro_License Preamble]
** [http://wikieducator.org/Libre_License_Draft_Creative_Commons_Deed License deed]
* [http://wikieducator.org/Declaration_on_libre_knowledge Declaration on libre knowledge]
* [http://wikieducator.org/Say_Libre Say Libre]
* [http://wikieducator.org/Libre_knowledge Libre knowledge]

Talk:4.0/ShareAlike

2011-12-11T01:02:46Z

Kt: /* How about reinstating ShareAlike (1.0)? */ clarify heading

==Does it make sense to discuss "ShareAlike" generically?==

Why not?

::e.g. CC-BY-SA is conceptually very different from CC-BY-NC-SA.
::CC-BY-SA is pro-freedom for society.
::CC-BY-NC-SA is pro-choice on behalf of authors - including the choice to impose restrictions on readers.

==How about reinstating ShareAlike ([http://creativecommons.org/licenses/sa/1.0/ 1.0] to 4.0)?==

Of all the licenses CC has ever produced, the Share-Alike license ([http://creativecommons.org/licenses/sa/1.0/ 1.0]) is closest to (a suggested) Libre Puro License.

Some of the rationale for the Libre Puro License might help with this discussion (on ShareAlike 4.0).

Is there room to consider formalisation of something as pro-freedom as this?

See:

http://wikieducator.org/Libre_Puro_License

the preamble:

http://wikieducator.org/Libre_License#Preamble_for_the_Libre_Puro_License

and the license deed:

http://wikieducator.org/Libre_License_Draft_Creative_Commons_Deed

Thanks :-) - [[User:Kt|Kt]] 00:26, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Talk:4.0/ShareAlike

2011-12-11T01:01:47Z

Kt: Does it make sense to discuss "ShareAlike" generically?

==Does it make sense to discuss "ShareAlike" generically?==

Why not?

::e.g. CC-BY-SA is conceptually very different from CC-BY-NC-SA.
::CC-BY-SA is pro-freedom for society.
::CC-BY-NC-SA is pro-choice on behalf of authors - including the choice to impose restrictions on readers.

==How about reinstating ShareAlike ([http://creativecommons.org/licenses/sa/1.0/ 1.0])?==

Of all the licenses CC has ever produced, the Share-Alike license ([http://creativecommons.org/licenses/sa/1.0/ 1.0]) is closest to (a suggested) Libre Puro License.

Some of the rationale for the Libre Puro License might help with this discussion (on ShareAlike 4.0).

Is there room to consider formalisation of something as pro-freedom as this?

See:

http://wikieducator.org/Libre_Puro_License

the preamble:

http://wikieducator.org/Libre_License#Preamble_for_the_Libre_Puro_License

and the license deed:

http://wikieducator.org/Libre_License_Draft_Creative_Commons_Deed

Thanks :-) - [[User:Kt|Kt]] 00:26, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

User:Kt

2011-12-11T00:35:28Z

Kt:

'''About me''': [http://wikieducator.org/User:KTucker my user page on WikiEducator].

'''Contact''': [[Special:EmailUser/KTucker|Email me]]

'''Mission''': pro-freedom

See:

* [http://wikieducator.org/Libre_Puro_License Libre Puro License] (draft)
** [http://wikieducator.org/Libre_License#Preamble_for_the_Libre_Puro_License Preamble]
** [http://wikieducator.org/Libre_License_Draft_Creative_Commons_Deed License deed]
* [http://wikieducator.org/Declaration_on_libre_knowledge Declaration on libre knowledge]
* [http://wikieducator.org/Say_Libre Say Libre]
* [http://wikieducator.org/Libre_knowledge Libre knowledge]

User:Kt

2011-12-11T00:32:57Z

Kt: Created page with "'''About me''': [http://wikieducator.org/User:KTucker my user page on WikiEducator]. '''Mission''': pro-freedom See: * [http://wikieducator.org/Libre_Puro_License Libre Puro L..."

'''About me''': [http://wikieducator.org/User:KTucker my user page on WikiEducator].

'''Mission''': pro-freedom

See:

* [http://wikieducator.org/Libre_Puro_License Libre Puro License] (draft)
** [http://wikieducator.org/Libre_License#Preamble_for_the_Libre_Puro_License Preamble]
** [http://wikieducator.org/Libre_License_Draft_Creative_Commons_Deed License deed]
* [http://wikieducator.org/Declaration_on_libre_knowledge Declaration on libre knowledge]
* [http://wikieducator.org/Say_Libre Say Libre]
* [http://wikieducator.org/Libre_knowledge Libre knowledge]

4.0/ShareAlike

2011-12-11T00:31:36Z

Kt: /* Relevant references */

{{4.0 Issue}}

There are roughly three issues that have been discussed for years that could potentially be addressed. Ideally, addressing one or more of these could increase clarity of relevant CC licenses, and increase range of and differentiation within CC license suite.

==ShareAlike scope==

Effectively, this has been treated as identical to potentially tweaking the definition of adaptations vs collections.
* Version 2.0 added "For the avoidance of doubt, where the Work is a musical composition or sound recording, the synchronization of the Work in timed-relation with a moving image ("synching") will be considered a Derivative Work for the purpose of this License." (Please discuss this particular clarifying language on the [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0/license_subject_matter#Automatic_localization_of_the_license License subject matter page].)
* Many have wanted something similar added clarifying when use of an image creates an adaptation/derivative. This was visited especially during discussions with the Wikimedia community, leading to no immediate change, but an assurance that the scope of BY-SA's copyleft would only be increased, if changed at all in the 3rd point of [[CC Attribution-ShareAlike Intent]]

Relatedly, it has also been pointed out that CC license definitions of work/adaptation/collection are somewhat hard to read.

=== Proposals relating to SA scope in 4.0 ===
''For ease of reference on discussion lists, please do not alter proposal numbers.''

'''''SA Proposal No. 1:''''' '''Make no changes.'''
* Pros:
* Cons:
* Other comments:

'''''SA Proposal No. 2:''''' '''Make work/adaptation/collection definitions easier to read, but strive to not make any effective change.'''
* Pros:
* Cons:
* Other comments:

'''''SA Proposal No. 3:''''' '''Expand scope of adaptation (thus SA) specifically for some class of use of images, analogous to synching added in 2.0.'''
* Pros:
* Cons:
* Other comments:

'''''SA Proposal No. 4:''''' '''A more aggressive expansion of SA, including some collections, except those that are mere aggregations (see GPL).'''
* Pros:
* Cons:
* Other comments:

''Please add other SA proposals here, and number them sequentially.''

==Source-requiring SA==

(Note that scope and whether source required are independent of each other.)

Some would like a copyleft for creative works that requires not just sharing adaptations under the same license, but making preferred form for modification available, as the GPL does for software. FDL includes a weaker requirement of providing copies in "transparent" formats. Especially the former may be too far for BY-SA to go (but costs/benefits could be listed to see). Could possibly be addressed via compatibility, see next.

==Compatibility with other copyleft licenses==

Directly related to the interoperability goal of 4.0. The following licenses have been discussed at various points, regarding compatibility with BY-SA:
* [http://artlibre.org/licence/lal/en Free Art License]
* [http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html Free Documentation License]
* [http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html GPL] (unique among these, could only be one-way with BY-SA as donor; would address desire for source-requiring license, long-term trend toward more mixing of "code" and "content" in ways beyond former accessing latter)
* [http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ Open Database LIcense] (ODbL)

Some things to consider in 4.0 process:
* What could be done to bring BY-SA into better alignment technically with these other licenses where they are in the same spirit?
* Should explicit compatibility with any of these be aimed for? In theory this could be a post-4.0 discussion assuming compatible licenses hook remains, but in practice, if compatibility is to be possible, 4.0 changes should be considered in that light
* Discuss with stewards of each of above licenses, with regard to BY-SA 4.0, future versions of their licenses, alignment, and explicit compatibility statements
* Similar to above, discuss with other stewards possibility of agreeing on/promoting common license text

===Considerations regarding compatibility of other licenses===
''Please add other important considerations to this discussion here.''

== Related debate ==
''We encourage you to sign up for the license discussion mailing list, where we will be debating this and other 4.0 proposals. HQ will provide links to related email threads from the license discussion mailing list here.''

== Relevant references ==
''Please add citations that ought inform this 4.0 issue below.''

* [http://wikieducator.org/Libre_Puro_License Libre Puro License] (draft)
** [http://wikieducator.org/Libre_License#Preamble_for_the_Libre_Puro_License Preamble]
** [http://wikieducator.org/Libre_License_Draft_Creative_Commons_Deed License deed]
* [http://wikieducator.org/Declaration_on_libre_knowledge Declaration on libre knowledge]
* [http://wikieducator.org/Say_Libre Say Libre]
* [http://wikieducator.org/Libre_knowledge Libre knowledge]

Talk:4.0/ShareAlike

2011-12-11T00:26:09Z

Kt: Created page with "==Libre Puro== The Share-Alike license is closest to Libre Puro of all the licenses CC has ever produced. Some of the rationale for the Libre Puro License might help with this..."

==Libre Puro==

The Share-Alike license is closest to Libre Puro of all the licenses CC has ever produced.

Some of the rationale for the Libre Puro License might help with this discussion (on ShareAlike 4.0).

Is there room to consider formalisation of something as pro-freedom as this?

http://wikieducator.org/Libre_Puro_License

Please also read the preamble:

http://wikieducator.org/Libre_License#Preamble_for_the_Libre_Puro_License

and check out the license deed:

http://wikieducator.org/Libre_License_Draft_Creative_Commons_Deed

Thanks :-) - [[User:Kt|Kt]] 00:26, 11 December 2011 (UTC)