[Open-access] Green Gold Gratis Libre

Fri Feb 24 15:27:35 UTC 2012

On 24 February 2012 15:18, Klaus Graf <klausgraf at googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> Yes.  It might be worth making the point that CC-BY is a libre licence
>>> (the canonical one, really) whereas CC-BY-NC is merely a gratis
>>> licence.
>>
>> Agreed. This is an excellent division
>
> This is the sort of confusion which makes us to an OA sect.

While I am not sure exactly what Klaus means by that last statement, I
do have to say that I agree that I mistaken in equating CC-BY with
libre and CC-BY-NC with gratis.  Suber's post explicitly says that he
considers CC-BY-NC to be a libre licence -- merely not the most
liberal.  It's unfortunate, but there it is.

To summarise:
        CC => libre (to some degree)
        CC-BY => BBB

I think that is all we can confidently say.

-- Mike.