"Public Domain except as noted" as a (copyright/permissions statement) is compatible with all licenses except for share alike and no derivatives licenses, and it makes it possible to gradually migrate to the Public Domain.
Critique of the CC licenses from the Public Domain standpoint[edit | edit source]
Not everyone who believes in open content is a supporter of Creative Commons and other open licenses. Here is a critique.
Ultimately, Creative Commons is another form of Copyright.
The Public Domain represents a completely different perspective:
- It emphasizes culture solutions based on ethics rather than law.
- It allows and encourages people to use their own best judgment, rather than negotiate permissions.
- It avoids chains of licenses and the questions of what are the boundaries of a work?
- It filters in people who truly want to share, and filters out those who want control.
- It recognizes that knowledge is worthless outside of context, but wealth is human relationships that are the context, thus orients us around people rather than content.
- It is a genuine solution that encourages genuine respect for licenses and the law.
- In the form of "Public Domain except as noted", it is compatible with all licenses except for "share alike" licenses, and it makes it possible to gradually migrate to the Public Domain.
See Andrius Kulikauskas (ms@ms.lt), Minciu Sodas and Worknets for more information about the Public Domain.
Page data| Authors |
Chris Watkins |
|---|
| License |
CC-BY-SA-3.0 |
|---|
| Language |
English (en) |
|---|
| What links here |
Public domain resources, Non-commercial licenses vs open licenses, ShareAlike clause, No derivatives clause, Licenses |
|---|
| Impact |
266 |
|---|
| Suggestions |
Add a main image |
|---|
| Created |
November 19, 2009 by Chris Watkins |
|---|
| Modified |
January 24, 2023 by Irene Delgado |
|---|
| Cite as |
Chris Watkins (2009–2023). "Public domain except as noted". Appropedia. Retrieved September 29, 2023. |
|---|
| API queries |
basic, semantic, html, files, more |
|---|
I whole heartedly agree that there are many advantages to both Public Domain and CC, as well as any other licenses that people can imagine. They have different uses in different situations.
I think it would be neat to see CC licenses that 'expire' to the public domain after a short period of time, especially with very timely material. As someone who often creates open content, I would feel most comfortable with this. Theres nothing greater than going into the Gutenberg library or to Archive.org and finding a giant repository of human culture.
Open Domain news and media content would make an awesome alternative to the AP. Imagine 'Journalists without borders' who volunteer insightful media content in the public domain - it would be almost a no brainer for newspapers and websites to syndicate those articles.
With open design/engineering/innovation, it could be difficult. Even convincing engineering designers of CC or other licenses is very difficult. However, the 'expiration' clause could work very well after a period of several years. The economic viablity of manufacturing relies on IP, and it will have to be carefully restructured to make OI applicable. However, for noncommercial purposes and for the right kind of engineers (eg. OSE, CCAT, etc.) PD could be right-on. --—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rerooting, 19 Nov 2009
- "CC licenses that 'expire' to the public domain after a short period of time, especially with very timely material. " - I love that idea. There'd be some complexities issues with wikis - the licenses on different people's contributions would expire at different times, and the term would be completely different for older contributions under a "non-expiring" license (actually, expiring in the same time frame as any other copyright material, depending on jurisdiction, and meaning the longest possibly time frame applies).
- But I believe technology will solve that, and other issues (such as individual contributors granting wider rights). We'll have sophisticated diff engines that highlight which sections of text are currently under which license. There could even be a different color again for text which will be expiring soon - if I'm in a wiki for for public domain text, I would also want to be notified of text which is entering the public domain in the next week or month. --Chriswaterguy 06:21, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
I don't understand how it could be compatible with licenses with a No Derivatives clause and not be compatible with a Share Alike licenses. --Mike Linksvayer 00:15, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- Good point. I'm pretty sure you're right, so I added "and no derivatives".
- Thanks Mike. --Chriswaterguy 06:01, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.
