tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6684892228522727295.post4115550299581587657..comments2024-01-20T06:07:52.753-05:00Comments on zotz: Crazy Idea Creative Commons NC Feezotzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14510111482279103861noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6684892228522727295.post-42296568276661078972012-09-01T19:05:55.070-04:002012-09-01T19:05:55.070-04:00I don't know that much would have to change. J...I don't know that much would have to change. Just license the use of the BY-NC* trademarks perhaps.<br /><br />Imagine if Flickr for instance could use any CC trademarks not containing NC gratis but had to pay a per work fee for each NC work hosted that used an NC trademark.<br /><br />Would they be willing to eat the fee?<br />Would they set up a business to help the NC folks monetize their zotzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14510111482279103861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6684892228522727295.post-76863573443172917942012-08-29T17:40:25.583-04:002012-08-29T17:40:25.583-04:00Regarding charging for use of a name or mark, I su...Regarding charging for use of a name or mark, I suppose that might be possible, but again the license mechanism would have to change significantly unless CC is going to advance the retrograde position that simply identifying a document requires permission from an "owner".<br /><br />Regarding royalty payments to fund the creation and administration of the mechanism, let alone to fund Mike Linksvayerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04125251658502322772noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6684892228522727295.post-18887961052451315802012-08-29T16:45:24.609-04:002012-08-29T16:45:24.609-04:00Mike, nothing would stop CC from asserting copyrig...Mike, nothing would stop CC from asserting copyright in the NC licenses if that was needed to make this work and they wanted to do this. I doubt it would be needed though.<br /><br />Why?<br /><br />Because they could instead charge for the use of the CC name in relation to the CC NC licenses. Sine the name is in the license text, the only way to avoid it would be to change the license and thus zotzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14510111482279103861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6684892228522727295.post-76080937264876966612012-08-28T22:27:26.581-04:002012-08-28T22:27:26.581-04:00By the way, although this is no doubt to some exte...By the way, although this is no doubt to some extent just confirmation of my biases, observing would-be NC+commercial licensing projects fail is another reason I find NC suboptimal and overused. There just isn't much profit realizable (almost always none or negative) from commercial exploitation-that-requires-copyright-permission of NC licensed works, yet the non-free license also destroys Mike Linksvayerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04125251658502322772noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6684892228522727295.post-1943246261677016832012-08-28T22:07:03.424-04:002012-08-28T22:07:03.424-04:00"(I don't remember the response if any)&q..."(I don't remember the response if any)" was supposed to be regarding question asked during CC-pre-announce-Q&A, typed in wrong place.Mike Linksvayerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04125251658502322772noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6684892228522727295.post-4960891529978414392012-08-28T22:05:32.618-04:002012-08-28T22:05:32.618-04:00It's not that crazy, or at least similar has b...It's not that crazy, or at least similar has been suggested before. I recall a friend suggesting charging per license to address provenance and funding issues during Q&A at http://conferences.oreillynet.com/cs/et2002/view/e_sess/2376 back when CC was pre-announced. An entity suggested a "Revenue Share" license, with CC getting a cut (of ad revenue) IIRC a few years ago (I don&#Mike Linksvayerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04125251658502322772noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6684892228522727295.post-21760705197035410522012-08-28T21:23:51.380-04:002012-08-28T21:23:51.380-04:00Well, I rather they dropped NC. But people not wan...Well, I rather they dropped NC. But people not wanting to pay the fee could just stick with the old versions. No bait and switch.<br /><br />Since the licenses are likely copyright Creative Commons, they can charge a fee and could collect about like people charge for use of copyright works now.<br /><br />Or am I being dense?zotzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14510111482279103861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6684892228522727295.post-29736689186372988272012-08-28T19:18:20.116-04:002012-08-28T19:18:20.116-04:00There's a problem with this plan: the earlier ...There's a problem with this plan: the earlier licensees would be played an illegal bait-and-switch, and the fee would be nearly unenforceable anyway.Carlos Solíshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09461969501108516152noreply@blogger.com