23 Matching Annotations
  1. Nov 2023
    1. The first set of copyright licenses was released in December 2002


      The first set of CC licenses was released on #2002/12/16 ( https://web.archive.org/web/20030207225048/http://creativecommons.org/press-releases/entry/3476 ) a month after I started my blog. I adopted the cc license in my blog the next month #2003/01/23 https://www.zylstra.org/blog/2003/01/creative_common/ even though then they were not congruent with EU/Dutch jurisdiction. Used a by nc sa license at first. Later changed to by sa, which is an open license rather than closed (because of nd).

    1. Creative Commons can be relied upon to take a generally pro-ownership and libertarian stance regarding rules and regulation

      This is bothersome seen from my perspective of both a CC advocate and European national chapter and as a CC using maker. In my experience makers using CC use CC because they want to limit the ownership current international copyright laws and treaties bestow on them, as they see them as obstacle and greedy, and generally not serving the maker but later exploiters of artefacts. Also the perspective of contributing to the common good / pool of culture is frequent, and counter libertarian angles. I need to check but I think it might also be a ways off from Lessig's original idea for CC as expressed in [[Free Culture by Lawrence Lessig]].

  2. Mar 2023
  3. Aug 2022
  4. Mar 2022
    1. l’usage des licences est très approximatif. Il nous est arrivé de trouver un même cours ayant de multiples licences, contradictoires, posées par les auteurs, l’Université et l’annuaire lui-même. Ce qui en pratique rend impossible son utilisation autrement qu’en simple document à consulter : on est alors très loin des REL.
  5. Aug 2021
    1. Review this chart that details which CC licenses work well for education resources and which do not.

      As @ThatPsychProf put it, it's pretty clear that BY-NC resources can work as OER. Some people disagree, which is fine. There are contexts in which the NC restriction is an important "crutch".

  6. Feb 2021
  7. Jul 2019
    1. How do you see Creative Commons and licensing affecting teaching and learning in K-12 or higher ed?

      Creative Commons is doing a very important job! There is a lot of misunderstanding in our world of education about who owns what and it is great to have an organization who specifically targets "reducing friction of sharing".

  8. Feb 2019
    1. LAST YEAR Flickr, a photo-sharing site, announced it would cut its free storage from 1 terabyte (more than 200,000 images) to just to 1,000 items. Starting this month, many users may find that their content is in danger of being deleted.

      Note that Flickr's new owner, SmugMug, promised to continue to host all CC-licensed images shared before 1 Nov 2018 for free.

    1. Flickr Commons photos will not be deleted. Anything uploaded with a CC license before November 1, 2018, won’t be deleted, but users will need to upgrade to Pro to upload more than 1,000 photos or videos.

      Flickr's new owner SmugMug promises to continue to host all CC-licensed images shared before 1 Nov 2018.

  9. Dec 2018
  10. Nov 2018
    1. Discuss?

      Read and annotate other contributions to this conversation about choosing a Creative Commons license sparked off by Robin DeRosa on Twitter, that has generated other contributions from folks like Maha Bali, Steve Foerster, and Steel Wagstaff (add more in the replies).

    1. Not Even Attribution

      Steve Foerster's contribution to the conversation about choosing a Creative Commons license sparked off by Robin DeRosa on Twitter, and generating other contributions from folks like Maha Bali and Steel Wagstaff (add more in the replies).

    2. Zero Is My Hero (CC0)

      Unfortunately, because Steve's blog doesn't have a copyright statement, all the material in the blog is fully protected by copyright.

    3. in economically developing societies, small scale proprietary educational institutions often serve the poor more successfully than public institutions do

      What is the evidence of this claim?

  11. Oct 2018
    1. Consequently, the SA condition does not apply to your contributions to modified works including these kinds of changes.

      Examples would really help. I can't imagine a scenario where anyone would care about this. As was pointed out in the comments, making minor corrections to a CC BY-SA work would not enable anyone to reshare that entire work with corrections under a new license. So the case here is if someone wanted to share minor corrections to a work independently of the work itself and license those minor corrections differently? For example: Here are my typo corrections to a published work, outside of the context of that published work? Example please...

    2. In other words, the CC licenses (all of which include the BY condition) enable the creator of a work to prohibit you from attributing them. However, except in the extremely rare cases where the creator explicitly prohibits you from attributing them, you are always required to attribute the creator of a work shared under a CC BY license.

      Except for the semi-famous case of the open resources collected in lardbucket, how often does this example appear in the wild?

  12. Aug 2018
    1. most of all, re-establishes education as a force for equity and social mobility — and I think open licensing is a crucial piece of that equation.I’m not content, though, with open licensing being the extent of our vision, and I hope many others feel the same way.

      Amen: open licensing as key infrastructure in improving public education rather than an end in itself!

  13. Feb 2014
    1. is the Creative Commons really a commons? According to its website, Creative Commons defines the spectrum of possibilities between full copyright - all rights reserved - and the public domain - no rights reserved. Our licenses help you keep your copyright while inviting certain uses of your work - a “some rights reserved” copyright. The point is clear: Creative Commons exists to help “you,” the producer, keep control of “your” work. You are invited to choose among a range of restrictions you wish to apply to “your” work, such as forbidding duplication, forbidding derivative works, or forbidding commercial use. It is assumed that as an author-producer everything you make and everything you say is your property. The right of the consumer is not mentioned, nor is the distinction between producers and consumers of culture disputed. Creative Commons legitimates, rather than denies, producer-control and enforces, rather than abolishes, the distinction between producer and consumer. It expands the legal framework for producers to deny consumers the possibility to create use-value or exchange-value out of the common stock.

      copyright choice explained