Changes between Version 5 and Version 6 of smo/licensing


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Sep 5, 2011, 8:36:12 PM (8 years ago)
Author:
Daniel Kahn Gillmor
Comment:

--

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • smo/licensing

    v5 v6  
    88== Why Drop the Non-Commercial Clause? ==
    99
    10 The Non-Commercial clause is ambiguous; It's not clear what constitutes a commercial re-use and what specifically is non-commercial.  Even if it was unambiguous, it would make the content not free for re-use by people who do legitimately need remuneration for their efforts in re-mixing, adapting, or re-publishing the information here.  We tend to think speech should be free, and we don't want licensing to get in the way of communication.
     10The Non-Commercial clause is ambiguous; It's not clear what constitutes a commercial re-use and what specifically is non-commercial.  Even if it was unambiguous, it would make the content not free for re-use by people who do legitimately need remuneration for their efforts in re-mixing, adapting, or re-publishing the information here.  We tend to think speech should be free, and we don't want licensing to get in the way of communication.  You might want to read [https://lists.mayfirst.org/pipermail/support-team/2011-August/000439.html some of the early discussion about this transition].
    1111
    1212== The Transition (2011-08-31) ==