Re: SV: [jox] Licence for articles
- From: jmp <m.pedersen lancaster.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2011 19:08:08 +0200
The NC clause, like all other copyleft or CC licenses, is just a
subclause added to copyright. If it is added to copyright, as some
suggest, then one has delimited the text in question and excluded any
commercial activity.
A boundary has been set.
However, as Mathieu notes, it can of course be waivered, in cases where
CSPP thinks that commercial action is a good thing (like-minded
projects, for instance, that make some money to keep their project going
by selling something like a magazine, including some text from the
journal). All that is required is a little bit of text added with the
copyright/CC text, stating that of course cool projects can use it for
commercial activity.
On the other hand, if NC is not used, then there is no way that anyone
can prevent someone like Rupert Murdoch using the text. Probably Murdoch
never would anyway, but a signal that the corporate economy is
undesirable has been sent. That's what the NC clause can do: establish a
boundary against corporations and send a signal that their behaviour is
not welcome in this common sphere.
There has been several waves of discussion on this topic on CC-community
( http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community ) over the
years with little resolution, - mostly clouded by rhetoric, dogma and
repetition and little argument.
-martin
On 02/06/11 18:45, Johan Söderberg wrote:
Guess I have the tiping vote!
As was already noted before, there is no practical significance to this choice. As with 98% of all CC licensed goods, It is all about self-promotion and sending the right signals. The ideological purist signal that we want to send is to ditch the non-commercial.
Hence: CC: BY-SA +1
Johan
________________________________________
Från: owner-journal oekonux.org [owner-journal oekonux.org] för Mathieu ONeil [mathieu.oneil anu.edu.au]
Skickat: den 2 juni 2011 18:33
Till: journal oekonux.org
Ämne: Re: [jox] Licence for articles
[Converted from multipart/alternative]
[1 text/plain]
Hi all
Um, crossed messages! OK, we have 2:2. I can see both sides.
Sending the strongest message about NC vs. favouring the spread of the licence... I guess we need more input?
cheers
Mathieu
----- Original Message -----
From: Stefan Merten <smerten oekonux.de>
Date: Thursday, June 2, 2011 6:22 pm
Subject: Re: [jox] Licence for articles
To: journal oekonux.org
Hi all!
2 hours ago Alex Halavais wrote:
I would make the argument for CC-BY-SA.
+1
NC is an anti-pattern for me. Free Software would not have been
possible with NC - so what should it be good for?
Grüße
Stefan
****
Dr Mathieu O'Neil
Adjunct Research Fellow
Australian Demographic and Social Research Institute
College of Arts and Social Science
The Australian National University
email: mathieu.oneil[at]anu.edu.au
web: http://adsri.anu.edu.au/people/visitors/mathieu.php
[2 text/html]
______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal
______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal
--
http://commoning.wordpress.com
"...I thought we were an autonomous collective..."
______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal