Talk:Meta:CC License Preference

From 43FoldersWiki

I've moved the bit of discussion we had (well, mostly me) we Merlin's talk page. --Robin Millette 13:59, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)

[edit] non-derivative clause for a wiki ?

Hello Merlin,

I just noticed the CC licence you're using for the wiki, and I have to wonder, what good is a ND clause for a wiki ? And while I'm at it, why make it NC ? Are you afraid people will profit from the information found here ? It's always going to lead be to 43folders, so I don't think that's a big deal either. But the ND clause is a real killer, I've touched on the subject on my page hosted here too. --Robin Millette 09:51, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)

Hey,

I'm open to talking about it. Sure. --Merlin 09:35, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)

Great ! Here's what the deed says about ND: "No Derivative Works. You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work.". We could look at the legal code, but right there, it's obvious ND is not designed for a public wiki were many people will contribute. Lessig is using a new licence for his own wiki preparing a new edition of his "Code" book, you might want to look at that for inspiration. But note that it's a "beta" licence, not ready for prime time yet.

About the NC clause, contrary to "Code", you won't be releasing this wiki as a book, well I don't think so. Making it NC only prevents people from distributing it further. For example, a few friends of mine at http://cogitateurs-agitateurs.org/ edited a compilation of texts on Free Information. We were going to print and sell at cost copies of the book. But we couldn't included any NC material for that reason. We could have contacted each author, but that would exemption, if provided, would have stopped at our group. Other groups, in other countries, wouldn't automatically be granted the right to print and distribute it themselves, even at cost. Or at least, that was our understanding of the clause. --Robin Millette 09:51, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)

[edit] Retroactive change?

I'm fine for making the license more liberal. Can we just do that and have it cover everything retroactively? (I find this stuff a little baffling, so feel free to lead me by the nose.)

You can change the licence if you have the agreement of all earlier contributors. So the sooner the better. I'm just a little surprised noone else jumped on this issue. Too busy doing stuff I guess... --Robin Millette 21:38, 26 Mar 2005 (EST)

So the idea is to change noderiv to sharealike? http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/

That would be fine with me (but I would prefer to change the license just this once if possible)

Is there a process people recommend for announcing the change and letting previous contributors opt out/remove their contributions? Maybe post it on the home page? Is there a best practice here?

--Merlin 23:29, 27 Mar 2005 (EST)