Subject: Re: Creative Commons Attribution
From: Russell McOrmond <>
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 23:01:33 -0400 (EDT)

On Fri, 11 Jun 2004, Russell Nelson wrote:

> Evan Prodromou writes:
>  > So, the Creative Commons licenses are not OSI-approved:
> Only because nobody has submitted them.

  As I see it only 2 of the 6 permutations would qualify as Open Source if
applied to software.  The "no derivatives"  and "no commercial" don't
quality, leaving Attribution (non-copyleft, BSD like) and
Attribution-ShareAlike (copyleft, but not as complex as the GPL).

  I didn't look into the actual licenses in detail yet, and am basing this
quick analysis just on the Commons Deeds.

  I think it would be informative for the OSI to look at the actual
licenses in detail and offer that advise.  The Creative Commons licenses
are not just focused on "peer production" type goals like the OSI, but
also just simple "peer distribution".

 Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <> 
 Open letters with Susan Crean
 Petition for Users' Rights, Protect Internet creativity and innovation
       Election 2004:
license-discuss archive is at