[okfn-discuss] Re: okfn-discuss Digest, Vol 14, Issue 10

[Ron Severdia]

On Nov 24, 2006, at 5:14 PM, Francis Irving wrote:

> OK. So do you:
>
> 1. Agree that if anyone prints your work, they have to give it away
> for no money.

Yes! They got it for no money so they should pass it on the same way.

>
> 2. Agree that this makes it unlikely that anyone will print quality,
> book versions of your work in large volumes.

It's already highly unlikely, but this will probably eliminate the  
chance of any deal. If a big publisher was SERIOUSLY INTERESTED,  
nothing would stop them from approaching me and getting specific  
permission based on a mutually acceptable agreement. It's always  
easier to loosen licensing that to tighten it.

>
> 3. That this means, largely, that you are restricting the audience of
> your work to people who own computers.

Why would you assume that? What about the student who prints a scene  
and brings it to class? What about the theatre director who prints 20  
copies for his actors? Or the teacher printing for their students? By  
and large, the internet itself is restricted to people who own  
computers.

>
> And if you do agree, can you explain why this does not bother you?

Because corporations without consciences suck. And they're everywhere.

Ron




>
> Francis
>
> On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 02:58:07PM -0800, Ron Severdia wrote:
>> Actually, the specifics are here: http://creativecommons.org/ 
>> licenses/
>> by-nc-sa/2.5/legalcode
>>
>> The link you sent was an older UK-only version. The relevant points
>> in the pertinent one being:
>>
>> 3. License Grant. Subject to the terms and conditions of this
>> License, Licensor hereby grants You a worldwide, royalty-free, non-
>> exclusive, perpetual (for the duration of the applicable copyright)
>> license to exercise the rights in the Work as stated below:
>>
>> -to reproduce the Work, to incorporate the Work into one or more
>> Collective Works, and to reproduce the Work as incorporated in the
>> Collective Works;
>> -to create and reproduce Derivative Works;
>> -to distribute copies or phonorecords of, display publicly, perform
>> publicly, and perform publicly by means of a digital audio
>> transmission the Work including as incorporated in Collective Works;
>> -to distribute copies or phonorecords of, display publicly, perform
>> publicly, and perform publicly by means of a digital audio
>> transmission Derivative Works;
>> The above rights may be exercised in all media and formats whether
>> now known or hereafter devised. The above rights include the right to
>> make such modifications as are technically necessary to exercise the
>> rights in other media and formats.
>>
>> This gives anyone the right to use, perform, or distribute the works
>> in any form they desire provided they give credit. Next is the
>> commercial aspect:
>>
>> 4c. Restrictions You may not exercise any of the rights granted to
>> You in Section 3 above in any manner that is primarily intended for
>> or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary
>> compensation. The exchange of the Work for other copyrighted works by
>> means of digital file-sharing or otherwise shall not be considered to
>> be intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private
>> monetary compensation, provided there is no payment of any monetary
>> compensation in connection with the exchange of copyrighted works.
>>
>> Obviously, this restricts the distribution for financial gain.
>> Therefore, unlimited copies can be printed by anyone at anytime. as
>> long as they are not sold.
>>
>> Ron
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Nov 24, 2006, at 1:59 PM, Francis Irving wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 09:26:55AM -0800, Ron Severdia wrote:
>>>> We really want "free" to mean "free" in every sense for the  
>>>> consumer/
>>>> user and corporate profit takes a back seat to that. The GPL and CC
>>>> Commercial licenses allow corporations the opportunity to make a
>>>> profit off of free labor and somebody else's ideas. There are
>>>> different types of "free" and the freedom to make a profit is
>>>> understandable, but not in good conscience. If all the books were
>>>> free, imagine how the literacy rate would increase!
>>>
>>> Does the Creative Commons definition of "Non-Commercial" mean that
>>> it would be breaking the license to print on paper a copy of the  
>>> work,
>>> and sell that paper copy?
>>>
>>> I can't tell for sure, but it looks to be the case to me.
>>> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/uk/legalcode
>>>
>>> If so, this means that nobody can ever ever print your work on paper
>>> and distribute it to lots of people, unless they are rich enough to
>>> fund the printing themselves and give away the physical copies.
>>>
>>> Therefore in your situation where "all the books are free" under a
>>> "Non-Commercial" license, there would be absolutely no paper copies.
>>> This would be problematic for literacy in areas where computers are
>>> not available.
>>>
>>> Francis
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> -- 
> Make this petition bulbous... http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/lightbulbs/
>
>