Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0 (freeculture.org)
13 points by zoowar on Aug 27, 2012 | hide | past | favorite | 7 comments



I help run a game club, where we design card games. We've abandoned Creative Commons because no license allows selling cards containing their images.

It seems to me that this proposed change might allow us to use Creative Commons licensed images, which would certainly accelerate our path to market.


Are you not able to use images that are CC (not NC) licensed? If you're trying to sell a game, you should probably be paying to license your artwork.


Exactly; but CC has no pay-for-commercial license.


It works in a different way: the CC licences tell you what you can do without asking permission. All the things that are not permitted by the licence can be directly discussed with the rights' holder.

So, if you see a CC-BY-ND piece of work and you want to use it for commercial purposes you mail the author and ask them for permission, maybe offering some money in exchange.

This is the "dual licensing" principles that allow GPL software to be used in proprietary buying from the rights' holder an additional licence that covers what is forbidden by the public licence. MySQL and Qt are famous example of this licensing regime. The only practical problem is that there is no standardised way to express the additional rights one can buy outside the basic licence. The "CC plus" initiative tried to address this problem but it seems that it is no longer developed.


Right; we need upward of 500 art pieces; CC is not going to work for us.


It is not CC that is not working for your; you have (understandable) problems dealing with 500 authors that do not share an agency.

CC images (BY-SA) could becoming a nice source of revenue thanks to Flickr (discovery) and their recent deal with Getty images (agency and rights bookkeeping). Right now Getty does not accept CC images, but once they will do this will greatly simplify the job of people that want to licence content without dealing directly with the authors.


Well of course. If CC is to be any good for us, it has to be that agency. And it isn't. So those authors don't get our money.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: