Comments on: Rethinking CC Licensing

By: Steve

Steve — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 22:07:31 +0000

Your post certainly makes sense. I thought about CC 0 too. The way I see Creative Commons is it expresses my preferences. Given the example of the photo collage my contribution of 1 photo in a collage of 200 makes my contribution too trivial to fuss over.

I may use CC 0 in more circumstances in the future, but for my presentations, interactives, and blog posts, I’ll stick with CC-BY. I don’t do formal academic writing myself, but I do understand your point on the differing standards for plagiarism.

By: Stian Håklev

Stian Håklev — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 20:04:28 +0000

I also usually use CC BY, but I have considered switching to CC 0. I also highly appreciate whenever people cite my work, but I think most people will continue doing so as a professional courtesy, I don’t necessarily think that needs to be regulated by law. An example is plagiarism – if I take your ideas and restate them in my own words, I am not breaking copyright law, but it would be deemed as plagiarism when used in an academic article without attribution. In the same way, I think professional environments can regulate attribution, and if you ever need to use some of my material in a setting where giving attribution is difficult, for example if you create a poster that is a collage of 200 pictures, and the credits would take more space than the finished artwork – then you don’t have to give credit.

By: How about a summer of OER? | openedweb.com

How about a summer of OER? | openedweb.com — Sun, 11 Jul 2010 17:00:39 +0000

[...] and facilitate the reuse of anything you plan to share. I have discussed Creative Commons and considerations for choosing a license other blog posts. If you want to designate a creation as an OER, Creative Commons is a good [...]

By: Christine Prefontaine

Christine Prefontaine — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 02:42:18 +0000

I mostly use Attribution Share-Alike because I like the idea of creating a chain of sharing and making sure that the commons is continually fed with new content. But you make a good case here. Something to think about. Thank you for taking the time to outline your reasoning!

By: Share-Alike Open, But Not Non-Commercial «

Share-Alike Open, But Not Non-Commercial « — Sat, 26 Jun 2010 16:34:15 +0000

[...] Wiley responds. Steve O’Connor on why he choses CC BY. Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Limitation of Liability in [...]

By: Steve

Steve — Fri, 25 Jun 2010 12:25:42 +0000

The creative Commons site has a licensing wizard There is Creative Commons licensed material on YouTube. While he doesn't state it on YouTube, Salman Khan, creator of the Kahn Academy videos, has a Creative COmmons BY-SA license prominently displayed on his website. Unfortunately he hosts all of his content on YouTube, whose terms of service prohibit downloads. Further most schools block YouTube, so they generally can't be used in the classroom. YouTube does offer a download service for many of his videos for $1. When one clicks the Download for .99 button, there is a clear CC-NC-ND endorsement on the download. Technically one could download the video and having paid the fee, distribute it freely in it's current form as long as it was noncommercial. It's interesting that he appears use 2 variants of CC licensing.

By: Don Watkins

Don Watkins — Fri, 25 Jun 2010 03:10:06 +0000

Interesting thoughts. I learned a lot more about CC licensing as I taught it to my students this year. Some sites make CC licensing easy. How do you sign up for CC licensing like you have? Also do you know if content creators on Youtube have the option to CC license as do those of us who use Flickr.com?