Difference between revisions of "Talk:4.0/NonCommercial"
Sanglorian (talk | contribs) (My reasoning) |
(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)) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
--[[User:Sanglorian|Sanglorian]] 08:38, 14 December 2011 (UTC) | --[[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. | ||
Latest revision as of 09:56, 29 February 2012
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.
--Sanglorian 08:38, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
BY NC SA and BY SA
Apologies for my absence (K 09:56, 29 February 2012 (UTC)). Just in case 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.
