|
Top-level
 @axbom wonderful! Thank you for your work on this. However... would you be open to a conversation about the license? I've done some copyright trainings in the past, and based on my and others' experience I believe that -NC is problematic. And that for most people and works, -SA would be more effective in achieving what they are often trying to achieve through -NC. 12 comments
@axbom right. Thank you for being open to this. Also, I want to very clearly recognize this is of course your art and your decision, and I have no business telling you how to license things! I hope that's obvious, but I feel it needs to be said. :blobuwu: The problem with NC is that it is vague and undefined. For example: can Wikipedia use an NC-licensed work? Wikipedia is supported by donations, and one *could* argue their use is therefore "commercial" in some sense. So Wikipedia avoids NC. @axbom but can I use your NC work on my blog? I blog for fun, and have no money in the game, so this sounds safe. But I also use my blog to promote myself, and sometimes I might get hired to do something based on the contents of it. Is that "commercial"? I don't know. Imagine an NGO that got grant money to promote the Fediverse. Can they use your fantastic work (with attribution, of course!)? NC does not make it clear, and if I were running that project, I would probably decide not to risk it. @axbom right. So that's the biggest downside for me. NC makes the work risky to use, and thus it will not be used by projects and in contexts that you might presumably want the work to be used in. SA solves this better in some ways. For example, no Big Corp would ever take an SA-licensed work and use it in an ad campaign or a product, film, etc, because they would have to release the whole thing under SA. Not gonna happen. I totally get your "I don't want people to make books with my content"… @axbom …but the way I see it (and I do have an SA-licensed blog), if somebody finds a way to monetize my SA-licensed content before I do, good on them! And there is a reasonable chance they will pay me anyway, so that I produce more of new juicy content for them to publish. That's obviously a very personal take, but I think it's worth considering. @axbom right? 🙂 Plus, some people *will* print and sell it anyway, regardless of the license. These people will just ignore the terms anyway, be it NC or SA or whatever else. Finally, all CC licenses allow you to be very clear how the attribution needs to look. You can be very specific about how it needs to be placed, etc, on a printed rendition, for example. Perhaps that's a way to deal with that issue as well, while switching to SA:  @rysiek @agarwaen @axbom finding the author's contact, writing them, and then *waiting for the answer* is prohibitive in many, especially precarious/non-profit creative processes. *could* i have asked xkcd to drop the nc from their battery-horse-staple comic to include it in some educational material that was printed and given away for donations? _very_ theoretically 😅😅😅 |
Gregory's Server
@rysiek definitely open to that conversation! Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Honestly I was probably a bit too quick when typing that license on the image. I usually have SA I realised!
But I also usually have NC in combination with this. You would suggest not having NC at all? My though when adding this for my blogs is to avoid people making books to sell with my content.