Message 00027 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: oxenrawT00030 Message: 3/4 L2 [In date index] [In thread index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

[ox-en] Decision chart for content creators

Hi Georg!

I share your letter below with our lab's group and also with the Oekonux group. This will be great. I appreciate your help, and I invite all of us to consider, What questions might help us make good decisions about choosing a license for our work, or placing it in the Public Domain.

I'm starting by considering some questions that I think are helpful for making decisions. I want to focus on goals, and not make presumptions about how. There may be several ways to achieve the same goal. And a particular goal (like the wish to be attributed, or wishes regarding commercial use) may have deeper issues behind them that should be brought out, I think.

I think a basic question for an author is, Do I want to be able to turn to the legal system to protect my rights? If the answer is No, then I think that copyright has nothing to offer. Copyright is a legal protection. Likewise, copyleft and the Creative Commons licenses are all grounded in copyright.

Copyright is not the only legal protection for authors. I think there are other laws that also provide some protection against misrepresentation, slander, etc.

So a basic question is, Would I really go to court to protect my rights? Or would I really threaten to go to court in order to do so? Or do I want people to fear that I might? If the answer is Yes, then copyright makes sense. If the answer is No, then Public Domain is definitely something to consider.

Another way to think about this is, Do I want to impose requirements? (With legal consequences) Or do I want to state wishes? (With moral consequences) Or some combination of both?

Other questions relate to, What do I want? What are my wishes? Or what do I don't want?

For example, Would I like to make money from my work?
That's a very different question then Do I want to keep others from making money from my work?
Or even, Do I want to make money from my work if other people do?
Each of these is a different choice on the decision chart.

Would I like to make money from my work?
There are various questions to ask further.
Do I want to make money from the sale of my rights to the particular work?
Or would I be happy if the creative work might help me get other jobs or leads?
Or am I willing to adapt my work to the wishes of a client?
Public Domain and Copyright may both offer different solutions for making money.

Likewise, for attributions.
Do I want to require that people attribute?
Do I allow them to use their best judgement?
Why do I want attribution?
Am I more interested that they bring traffic to my site?
Am I more interested that they show me in a good light?
Do I want to be held responsible for my ideas?
Do I want people to contact me regarding them?

Many questions! and it would be good to add more.


Andrius Kulikauskas
Minciu Sodas

Georg Pleger wrote:

Hello Andrius, Hello everybody!

Yes I'm interested in joining your efforts for preparing an alternative "decision chart" for content creators. It will be an interesting exercise trying to observe myself in two different roles:

1) As an organizational project lead for Creative Commons Austria it is clear, what needs to be done: (Organizing the) Porting of a predefined set of "copyright building blocks" from the original to a version compatible with Austrian Law.

2) An other thing will be my role as a content creator in different contexts. In this role I have to decide whether to choose one of the specific Creative Commons Licenses or public domain.

And maybe it's helpful to introduce the third, forth ... role as one responsible for advising e.g. an educational institution which license to choose by default. etc.

In the first role I will be happy if more people even start thinking about copyright questions. And so they need a smooth and easy way. In the second role it will be an interesting question how radical an approach is viable for me e.g. within an academic context of 2004 (as opposed to one of 2006, 2008 ...) example scenario: Writing your PhD dissertation already in the writing process available online and as public domain.

Will be a helpful discussion!

Greetings from Austria

Andrius Kulikauskas:
- For my workshop at Oekonux, I want to make a "decision chart" for
helping people make good decisions about when to place content in the Public Domain, when to use copyright, and when to use special forms of copyright such as Creative Commons or copyleft. I ask George Pleger for help, he will be presenting at Oekonux. Creative Commons does have a "decision chart" but I think: A) it's oriented around legal action (with regard to "rights" and "requirements") rather than moral action (with regard to "preferences" and "wishes") B) it's oriented around restricting use (like "no commercial use") rather than achieving goals (like "help me make money"). C) it's oriented around how people are supposed to behave, rather than how they actually do behave. For social networking, it's very important for most of the content (in Wikis and elsewhere) to be definitely in the Public Domain. Any kind of copyright (which includes Creative Commons and copyleft) requires that:
A) the license be noted and kept track of
B) the boundaries of the material be marked
and this represents a burden when working with micro-content. It is a tax on the free flow of content needed for the sake of building relationships, accumulating repositories of knowledge, and allowing others to take over as stewards. All forms of copyright (including Creative Commons and copyleft) restrict the "freedom to fork". What I mean is that it is very prudent to realize that a project like Minciu Sodas or OneVillage or ThinkCycle or Wikipedia will come to an end, perhaps sooner rather than later. It's important to prepare for the day when we hope that some or all of our content may be used by somebody else. They should be free to continue with their own license. I think it's not helpful for us to impose a license on them. It's presumptious to assume that we know what's best for them. The "freedom to fork" is less important for software because "software likes to clump". But "content likes to disintegrate" and so the freedom to fork is much more important. Perhaps 1% of our project will have lasting value. It's not right for it to be captive to any particular license. So I want to have a realistic "decision chart" that helps explain that, if we don't want to rely on the power of the courts, then copyright of any kind is not relevant or helpful. But I do want it to help explain, in real life terms, when to use copyright, and what flavor of copyright. Anyways, I appreciate discussion on what's important to us in making our copyright decisions.

Organization: projekt

Thread: oxenrawT00030 Message: 3/4 L2 [In date index] [In thread index]
Message 00027 [Homepage] [Navigation]