CategoriesArchiveSearchRandom
View the archives

or

Search the archives
 

copyright… or copyleft?

December 11th, 2004
I have updated to the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported [creativecommons.org] license. The link(s) and text below are to the older 2.0 version.

The works on the site are released under the Creative Commons “Attribution 2.0” [ creativecommons.org ] license (unless otherwise explicitly stated).

What?

From the Creative Commons webisite [creativecommons.org]:

Attribution 2.0

You are free:

  • to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work
  • to make derivative works
  • to make commercial use of the work

Under the following conditions:

  • For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work.
  • Any of these conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder.

Your fair use and other rights are in no way affected by the above.

This is a human-readable summary of the Legal Code (the full license).

Why?

Because I’m a nice guy and because of things like this [ wikipedia.org ]! I think copyright is a good thing in general. But the insatiable desires of the capitalist enterprises chasing the all mighty dollar (or Euro, or Yen, or Pound, or Renminbi, or whatever) has pushed copyright so far beyond what is reasonable that they are in fact destroying the vary basis of what makes free markets and capitalism work. I don’t agree with the Copyright Term Extension Act (aka the Sunny Bono Act or the Mickey Mouse Act) which extended copyright but neither will I resort to piracy of copyrighted material. I choose to fight the system from within the framework of the law. I do not believe that we have come to a point where breaking the law is the only effective way of changing the law [ eldred.cc ].

Comments are closed.