Conversation:
Notices
-
I know this would probably make it non-free, but I'd like a Creative Commons license with a no-for-profit-corporations clause. !cc
-
Unexpectedly smooth transition: Paper Planes (M.I.A.) -> Can't Touch This (M.C. Hammer).
-
@jacobwb why not share-alike?
-
@jacobwb With SA, corporations can't mix their copyrighted works with your work.
-
well, technically, they can so long as the put the mixed portions under the sa... they are still copyrighted...
-
@zotz Drats! That always happens to me. "Proprietary" is as inaccurate - free software has property. "Privative" is a very biased term.
-
consider this then: http://ur1.ca/6q2l5
-
@bentinc Share-alike is only copyleft, corporations can still use any CC-by-SA works, as long as they don't proprietize/monopolize them.
-
@csolisr Somewhat true. Though, as long as the works stay separated, they can use them for whatever they want and make money doing so.
-
@csolisr Imagine a billion dollar corporate conglomerate like Warner Bros. selling indie bands' CC SA songs & not paying the original artist
-
@csolisr Similarly, EA can use indie bands' CC-by-SA songs, and graphic art works such as free textures, and not pay them for doing so.
-
@csolisr I think it's perfectly fine for an indie game to use an indie bands' CC songs without paying to do so. They wouldn't make millions.
-
@jacobwb Wrong. EA would have to mix the song with the game; that would qualify as a derivative work.
-
@jacobwb Nothing prevents the indie bands from doing it first, but if that is truly a concern, there's always NC
-
@jacobwb and why shouldn't they? They have to give the same rights to others after all e.g. sharing. Not the best business model, is it? ;)
-
@zotz How does a more lax permissive license solve the problem?
-
@jacobwb in the EA example, everyone would then be able to create merch without their consensus using that same artwork.
-
@csolisr The songs can remain as separate MP3 files. That wouldn't qualify as a derivative work, nor would it affect the games copyright.
-
@csolisr NC is too restrictive on non-corporations: http://ur1.ca/ahaut http://ur1.ca/ahauu
-
@jacobwb I suppose you know the problems with -nc? http://ur1.ca/0tceu
-
@bentinc Yes, but nobody wants to make a t-shirt of a wood texture, random 3D gun models or whatever. EA's trademarks would be unaffected.
-
@bentinc Yes. That's why I'd want a NC-only-for-corporations clause.
-
@bentinc Everyone but corporations can use, sell, modify, and distribute the work without paying royalties. I think that'd be great.
-
@jacobwb and how do you plan to differentiate between big business and some person who wants to create and sell her indie game?
-
@jacobwb thats a difficult thing to do, philosophically as well as in (german) law. US law might differ in this regard but I doubt it.
-
@jacobwb sounds like "in a perfect world we'd..." to me. :)
-
@bentinc Small businesses aren't usually corporations, correct? I don't know how it'd be implemented, it'd probably only be useful in court.
-
@bentinc :( Yeah... Maybe this would work "This work is licensed under CC-by-SA, unless you're a corporation making millions of dollars." ;)
-
@jacobwb anyway, as I'm no corporation I'm looking forward to take a glance at your stuff once u decided on a licence! :)
-
@jacobwb let's just include a clause "you know who you are" ;)
-
@bentinc Haha, it'd be funny to use such a clause even if it doesn't add any additional legal protection :)
-
@bentinc :)
-
It is not permissive per se. it is more a copyleft among people. Rather than a copyleft per work, it is a copyleft per person.
-
@jacobwb Let me get it straight: CC-BY-NC is too privative, but CC-BY-SA is too free for you. Why not simply cope up with corporative use?