Creative Commons?

5 views
Skip to first unread message

Roger Firth

unread,
May 2, 2003, 6:01:12 AM5/2/03
to
I've just come across this concept, explained at
http://creativecommons.org/

Without in any way wanting to start another copyright
thread, it occurs to me that the Creative Commons idea
might fit well with what we're doing, especially the
Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial license at
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd-nc/1.0/
and these underlying Baseline Rights
http://creativecommons.org/learn/licenses/fullrights

Cheers, Roger
--
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
You'll find my Cloak of Darkness, Parsifal, Informary
and more at http://www.firthworks.com/roger/


Stephen Granade

unread,
May 2, 2003, 8:08:09 AM5/2/03
to
"Roger Firth" <ro...@firthworks.com> writes:

> I've just come across this concept, explained at
> http://creativecommons.org/
>
> Without in any way wanting to start another copyright
> thread, it occurs to me that the Creative Commons idea
> might fit well with what we're doing, especially the
> Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial license at
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd-nc/1.0/
> and these underlying Baseline Rights
> http://creativecommons.org/learn/licenses/fullrights

I looked at this when it was first announced, and have thought
seriously about using their licenses for future games. The main
benefit I can see is that their licenses have been created by people
who know the law, instead of being created by people like me who just
slap a few words together and hope the resulting wall is legally
binding enough.

Stephen

--
Stephen Granade
ste...@granades.com

Roger Firth

unread,
May 2, 2003, 11:50:40 AM5/2/03
to
> I looked at this when it was first announced, and have thought
> seriously about using their licenses for future games. The main
> benefit I can see is that their licenses have been created by people
> who know the law, instead of being created by people like me who just
> slap a few words together and hope the resulting wall is legally
> binding enough.


That's my thinking. The sentiments seem right, and the legal side
has greater credibility and is much more likely to hold water.

Kathleen Fischer

unread,
May 2, 2003, 12:44:14 PM5/2/03
to
"Roger Firth" <ro...@firthworks.com> wrote in message
news:105189064...@damia.uk.clara.net

(Hmmm... attribution got lost somehow)


> > I looked at this when it was first announced, and have thought
> > seriously about using their licenses for future games. The main
> > benefit I can see is that their licenses have been created by people
> > who know the law, instead of being created by people like me who just
> > slap a few words together and hope the resulting wall is legally
> > binding enough.
>
> That's my thinking. The sentiments seem right, and the legal side
> has greater credibility and is much more likely to hold water.

Certainly looks more "official" than the 3 lines of text I stick on
my games, but would we have to type in all that stuff or could we
just point there?

"... for legalese go here: http://something.something.something"

And if we just point to it, and the link goes away, what does that
mean for the games themselves?

Kathleen
-- Inevitable -
http://www.ifarchive.org/if-archive/games/zcode/Inevita.z5
-- and Masquerade (Mask.z5) and The Cove (Cove.z5)
-- plus Prized Possession
--
http://www.ifarchive.org/if-archive/games/competition2001/inform/possess
-- Excuse me while I dance a little jig of despair


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Andrew Plotkin

unread,
May 2, 2003, 1:45:50 PM5/2/03
to
Here, Kathleen Fischer <mfis...@aol.com> wrote:
> "Roger Firth" <ro...@firthworks.com> wrote in message
> news:105189064...@damia.uk.clara.net

> (Hmmm... attribution got lost somehow)
>> > I looked at this when it was first announced, and have thought
>> > seriously about using their licenses for future games. The main
>> > benefit I can see is that their licenses have been created by people
>> > who know the law, instead of being created by people like me who just
>> > slap a few words together and hope the resulting wall is legally
>> > binding enough.
>>
>> That's my thinking. The sentiments seem right, and the legal side
>> has greater credibility and is much more likely to hold water.

> Certainly looks more "official" than the 3 lines of text I stick on
> my games, but would we have to type in all that stuff or could we
> just point there?

> "... for legalese go here: http://something.something.something"

> And if we just point to it, and the link goes away, what does that
> mean for the games themselves?

If you want to be clear, copy the entire license file (as a text file)
and put it in the .zip file (or whatever) with your game and readme.

If you want to be super hyper clear, copy the license file into your
source code and turn it into a print statement. Have a verb
"license" or "help license" or something which prints it all out.

--Z

"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."
*
* Make your vote count. Get your vote counted.

L. Ross Raszewski

unread,
May 2, 2003, 4:58:31 PM5/2/03
to
On Fri, 2 May 2003 16:50:40 +0100, Roger Firth <ro...@firthworks.com> wrote:
>> I looked at this when it was first announced, and have thought
>> seriously about using their licenses for future games. The main
>> benefit I can see is that their licenses have been created by people
>> who know the law, instead of being created by people like me who just
>> slap a few words together and hope the resulting wall is legally
>> binding enough.
>
>
>That's my thinking. The sentiments seem right, and the legal side
>has greater credibility and is much more likely to hold water.
>

Creative Commons, and what i think about it, are a fair chunk of the
subject of an essay I recently wrote on licensing. If anyone's
interested:

http://justice.loyola.edu/~lraszews/drm2.ps

David Kinder

unread,
May 2, 2003, 6:07:43 PM5/2/03
to
> I've just come across this concept, explained at
> http://creativecommons.org/

It's a site well worth investigating. Lawrence Lessig and colleagues
deserve more mainstream recognition for the work they're doing ...

David


Jim Aikin

unread,
May 3, 2003, 12:31:37 AM5/3/03
to

> Creative Commons, and what i think about it, are a fair chunk of the
> subject of an essay I recently wrote on licensing. If anyone's
> interested:
>
> http://justice.loyola.edu/~lraszews/drm2.ps

I'd be interested. Can you post it in something other than a PostScript
format? (At least, that's what my browser _thinks_ .ps means....)

--JA


Joe Mason

unread,
May 3, 2003, 1:16:45 AM5/3/03
to

You can get a free PostScript viewer for Windows here:

http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~ghost/gsview/get44.htm

Joe

Arnel Legaspi

unread,
May 3, 2003, 7:03:35 AM5/3/03
to
Roger Firth wrote:
> I've just come across this concept, explained at
> http://creativecommons.org/
>
> Without in any way wanting to start another copyright
> thread, it occurs to me that the Creative Commons idea
> might fit well with what we're doing, especially the
> Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial license at
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd-nc/1.0/
> and these underlying Baseline Rights
> http://creativecommons.org/learn/licenses/fullrights

Hi -

I read something on the third link you specified about the license
being applicable "worldwide" or something to that effect.

Should I take it literally? Or should I consult a lawyer here in my
country to discuss that?

Or should I just put something that resembles most IF copyright texts
(in their "about"/"license" commands) in my own game?

I do agree, though, that the terms set forth in the
Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial license fits well with the projects
we are doing.

Thanks!

Roger Firth

unread,
May 6, 2003, 9:45:03 AM5/6/03
to
"Andrew Plotkin" <erky...@eblong.com> wrote in message
news:b8uase$qrp$3...@reader1.panix.com...

> Here, Kathleen Fischer <mfis...@aol.com> wrote:
> ...

> > Certainly looks more "official" than the 3 lines of text I stick on
> > my games, but would we have to type in all that stuff or could we
> > just point there?
>
> > "... for legalese go here: http://something.something.something"
>
> > And if we just point to it, and the link goes away, what does that
> > mean for the games themselves?
>
> If you want to be clear, copy the entire license file (as a text file)
> and put it in the .zip file (or whatever) with your game and readme.
>
> If you want to be super hyper clear, copy the license file into your
> source code and turn it into a print statement. Have a verb
> "license" or "help license" or something which prints it all out.

I think super hyper clear is good. I've created a simple download
which does that for Inform, available at
http://www.firthworks.com/roger/downloads/CCPL.h
If it seems to do what's needed, I'll upload it to the Archive.

Kathleen Fischer

unread,
May 6, 2003, 11:53:38 AM5/6/03
to
"Roger Firth" <ro...@firthworks.com> wrote in message
news:b98ed1$gpfp6$1...@ID-62041.news.dfncis.de

> I think super hyper clear is good. I've created a simple download
> which does that for Inform, available at
> http://www.firthworks.com/roger/downloads/CCPL.h
> If it seems to do what's needed, I'll upload it to the Archive.

Ooooo! You wonderful person you! :) And here I was, dreading
having to type all stuff in. I'll check it out tonight.

Many thanks,
Kathleen

-- and Masquerade (Comp00)(Mask.z5) and The Cove (ArtShow00)(Cove.z5)
-- Prized Possession (Comp01) .../games/competition2001/inform/possess
-- Coming soon: Redemption (ArtShow03)

Roger Firth

unread,
May 6, 2003, 2:16:13 PM5/6/03
to
"Kathleen Fischer" <mfis...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:2f31adf3b71a5a3432e...@mygate.mailgate.org...

> "Roger Firth" <ro...@firthworks.com> wrote in message
> news:b98ed1$gpfp6$1...@ID-62041.news.dfncis.de
>
> > I think super hyper clear is good. I've created a simple download
> > which does that for Inform, available at
> > http://www.firthworks.com/roger/downloads/CCPL.h
> > If it seems to do what's needed, I'll upload it to the Archive.
>
> Ooooo! You wonderful person you! :) And here I was, dreading
> having to type all stuff in. I'll check it out tonight.


Many thanks. And let me know if you can see any
obvious improvements.

Roger Carbol

unread,
May 7, 2003, 8:03:03 PM5/7/03
to
> I think super hyper clear is good. I've created a simple download
> which does that for Inform, available at
> http://www.firthworks.com/roger/downloads/CCPL.h
> If it seems to do what's needed, I'll upload it to the Archive.


I've ported this to TADS 2:
http://members.shaw.ca/rcarbol/if/CCPL_t.zip

.. Roger Carbol ..

MFischer5

unread,
May 7, 2003, 11:35:58 PM5/7/03
to
>From: "Roger Firth" ro...@firthworks.com
>
>"Kathleen Fischer" <mfis...@aol.com> wrote in message
>> "Roger Firth" <ro...@firthworks.com> wrote in message
>>
>> > I think super hyper clear is good. I've created a simple download
>> > which does that for Inform, available at
>> > http://www.firthworks.com/roger/downloads/CCPL.h
>> > If it seems to do what's needed, I'll upload it to the Archive.
>>
>> Ooooo! You wonderful person you! :) And here I was, dreading
>> having to type all stuff in. I'll check it out tonight.
>
>Many thanks. And let me know if you can see any
>obvious improvements.

Looks perfect. I tried out both original receipe (using Menus.h) and
the new flavor (sans Menus.h) and both work as advertised. I
particularly liked the fact it took me all of 2 lines of code to
implement fully. :)

uh... of course I was stupid and put it in the source for Redemption
so you'll have to wait a few weeks before I can upload it for the
world to see. :(

Kathleen

-- Inevitable (SpringComp03) -
http://www.ifarchive.org/if-archive/games/zcode/Inevita.z5
-- ... also The Cove (ArtShow00)(Cove.z5) and Masquerade (Comp00)(Mask.z5)
-- plus Prized Posession (Comp01) .../games/competition2001/inform/possess

Roger Firth

unread,
May 8, 2003, 2:48:30 AM5/8/03
to
"Roger Carbol" <rca...@home.com> wrote in message
news:82675075.03050...@posting.google.com...

Excellent; thanks! Any volunteers for Hugo, Alan, ... ?
And maybe the raif FAQ could host a small section on Licenses ... ?

Al

unread,
May 8, 2003, 7:48:50 AM5/8/03
to
MFischer5 wrote:

> >
>
> Looks perfect. I tried out both original receipe (using Menus.h) and
> the new flavor (sans Menus.h) and both work as advertised. I
> particularly liked the fact it took me all of 2 lines of code to
> implement fully. :)
>
> uh... of course I was stupid and put it in the source for Redemption
> so you'll have to wait a few weeks before I can upload it for the
> world to see. :(
>
>

I already have AltMenu.h in my Comp GAme and when I tried
to incorporate it I got a bunch of compiler errors for some reason.

>
>
>


Roger Firth

unread,
May 8, 2003, 8:13:27 AM5/8/03
to
"Al" <rad...@qadas.com> wrote in message
news:3EBA4422...@qadas.com...

>
> I already have AltMenu.h in my Comp GAme and when I tried
> to incorporate it I got a bunch of compiler errors for some reason.

Yet again, Al, "a bunch of compiler errors" isn't too helpful.
For the umpteenth time, if you get a problem, please describe
it /precisely/.

Well, I only said it /should/ work with menu packages which are
compatible with Menus.h. And AltMenu does indeed seem to be
compatible. And indeed CCPL does work with AltMenu. Well,
there's a result.

So let me guess. You added the line ' Include "Menus"; ', even though
you already had a menu package installed? Try it again, without
that line.

Al

unread,
May 8, 2003, 9:25:57 AM5/8/03
to
Roger Firth wrote:

> "
>
> So let me guess. You added the line ' Include "Menus"; ', even though
> you already had a menu package installed? Try it again, without
> that line.
>

Sorry Roger, you blew it! ! NO I did not add Include "Menus"

I'll send listing of the compiler errors if you want.

Al

Al

unread,
May 8, 2003, 9:45:28 AM5/8/03
to
OK Roger here's the error listing:

Macintosh Inform 6.21 (biplatform, G0.37) (24th Aug 2000)
[Running ICL file 'Hard Drive:Desktop Folder:zCurrent Work:Files:aaa.icl']
[Compiling <Comp.inf>]
":Library:AltMenu.h", line 128: Error: Expected new class name but found Option

> Class Option
":Library:AltMenu.h", line 131: Error: Expected directive, '[' or class name
but found if
> if
":Library:AltMenu.h", line 133: Error: Expected directive, '[' or class name
but found else
> else
":Library:AltMenu.h", line 134: Error: Expected directive, '[' or class name
but found ]
> ]
":Library:AltMenu.h", line 290: Error: Expected new class name but found Menu
> Class Menu
":Library:AltMenu.h", line 291: Error: Expected directive, '[' or class name
but found return
> with select [; return
":Library:AltMenu.h", line 291: Error: Expected directive, '[' or class name
but found ]
> with select [; return Menu_Controller.select(self);]
":Library:AltMenu.h", line 292: Error: Expected directive, '[' or class name
but found print
> tag [; print
":Library:AltMenu.h", line 292: Error: Expected directive, '[' or class name
but found ]
> ag [; print (name) self;]

Roger Firth

unread,
May 8, 2003, 9:56:13 AM5/8/03
to
"Al" <rad...@qadas.com> wrote in message
news:3EBA5F77...@qadas.com...

> OK Roger here's the error listing:

So, the CCPL instructions say:

Include "Menus";
Include "CCPL";

My second guess is that, for some reason, you've chosen to
Include CCPL /before/ the menu package?

Nikos Chantziaras

unread,
May 8, 2003, 5:21:39 PM5/8/03
to
Kathleen Fischer wrote in message
news:a761f93bca88b863029...@mygate.mailgate.org...
> [...]

> Certainly looks more "official" than the 3 lines of text I stick on
> my games, but would we have to type in all that stuff or could we
> just point there?
>
> "... for legalese go here: http://something.something.something"
>
> And if we just point to it, and the link goes away, what does that
> mean for the games themselves?

The GPL FAQ states (and I think the advice applies to every other license):

Q:
Why does the GPL require including a copy of the GPL with every copy
of the program?

A:
Including a copy of the license with the work is vital so that
everyone who gets a copy of the program can know what his rights are.
It might be tempting to include a URL that refers to the license,
instead of the license itself. But you cannot be sure that the URL
will still be valid, five years or ten years from now. Twenty years
from now, URLs as we know them today may no longer exist.

The only way to make sure that people who have copies of the program
will continue to be able to see the license, despite all the changes
that will happen in the network, is to include a copy of the license
in the program.

Q:
What if the work is not much longer than the license itself?

A:
If a single program is that short, you may as well use a simple all-
permissive license for it, rather than the GNU GPL.


-- Niko
http://members.lycos.co.uk/realnc


Nikos Chantziaras

unread,
May 8, 2003, 5:26:10 PM5/8/03
to
Jim Aikin wrote in message
news:3EB34634.3030404@end_of_spam.org...

If Ross agrees (Ross, what's the "L." in your name?), I could convert it to
PDF, send it back to him for posting it somewhere.


-- Niko
http://members.lycos.co.uk/realnc


Al

unread,
May 9, 2003, 4:20:44 PM5/9/03
to
Roger was correct. I had my includes out of place.

Be that as it may, I cut and pasted the necessary
text into my existing menu option.


John Colagioia

unread,
May 27, 2003, 1:05:18 PM5/27/03
to
"Roger Firth" <ro...@firthworks.com> wrote in news:1052244978.97526.0
@eunomia.uk.clara.net:
[...]

> Many thanks. And let me know if you can see any
> obvious improvements.

Probably far later than such comments should come, but one possible
improvement that comes to mind would be to use the entire license,
allowing an author to change his definitions. For example, one might
wish to allow for automatic commercial release, whereas other might
want to use "Share Alike" instead of "No Derivative Works."

What I might suggest is maybe a set of flags to turn each option on
or off (maybe via preprocessor directive, so the whole license package
doesn't get crammed into every game), with some "obvious" combinations
predefined, and the current suggested version provided as the default.

Of course, it's certainly quite nice as-is, too, seeing as how it does
cover the most common case.

Adrien Beau

unread,
May 27, 2003, 3:13:57 PM5/27/03
to
On Mardi 27 Mai 2003 19:05, John Colagioia wrote:
>
> What I might suggest is maybe a set of flags to turn each option
> on or off (maybe via preprocessor directive, so the whole
> license package doesn't get crammed into every game), with some
> "obvious" combinations predefined, and the current suggested
> version provided as the default.

There are eleven combinations, so rather than offering options,
you could just list them all in the source code, perhaps.

--
spam....@free.fr
You have my name and my hostname: you can mail me.
(Put a period between my first and last names).
(boa13? A nickname I didn't intend to use here).

Roger Firth

unread,
May 28, 2003, 3:27:43 AM5/28/03
to
"John Colagioia" <JCola...@csi.com> wrote in message
news:0a99445183af4c38a212d1f1f51563dc@TeraNews...

>
> Probably far later than such comments should come, but one possible
> improvement that comes to mind would be to use the entire license,
> allowing an author to change his definitions. For example, one might
> wish to allow for automatic commercial release, whereas other might
> want to use "Share Alike" instead of "No Derivative Works."
>
> What I might suggest is maybe a set of flags to turn each option on
> or off (maybe via preprocessor directive, so the whole license package
> doesn't get crammed into every game), with some "obvious" combinations
> predefined, and the current suggested version provided as the default.
>
> Of course, it's certainly quite nice as-is, too, seeing as how it does
> cover the most common case.

I felt that the law of diminishing returns would set in almost immediately
I went past that most common case. My aim was to make it really easy
for folks without much experience in the legal stuff to apply a sensible
license
to their work. Anybody who feels strongly that one of the other licenses
would be more appropriate can of course do just what I did -- cut'n'paste
the Creative Commons material into Inform-printable text -- but I didn't
see it as worth my time and trouble.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages