new licensing model
Matthew Seth Flaschen
superm40 at comcast.net
Fri Dec 16 14:28:55 UTC 2005
>>"- to give authors the opportunity to get paid even when their works were used
>>in the works of other authors and the copies of the works of other authors are
>>used for making money."
That goal is fundamentally contrary to OSD #1. Take your "new licensing model"
elsewhere. Furthermore, this is for proposing concrete licenses. To find out
how to do so, read http://opensource.org/docs/certification_mark.php#approval
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Nikolai" <n_k at au.ru>
> New licensing model
> This article is my explanation why, from my point of view, the new licensing
> model is necessary.
> I decided to start developing new licensing model a few months ago after
> email talks with people regarding some ideas about Open Source, KM standards,
> Social Networks Analysis, Text Structuring, Text Viruses and Media projects
> based on citizen's journalism and multi-blog software platform jDnevnik.com -
> http://jdnevnik.com , which won this year Russian Sun Microsystems contest in
> J2EE category - http://ru.sun.com/news/press/2005/september/pr010905.html .
> All these talks indicated me that something stops the constructive dialogues
> this must have some general explanation. That was a question.
> In my understanding the relevant problem is following:
> Currently content based business, free content exchange and growing deluge of
> content in the web are lacking in opportunities:
> - to get global recognition for authors and their works;
> - to see what's new, the derivative works, based on the original and other
> derivative works and therefore not to "invent a wheel", decide which work is
> worth to develop further, forecast a progress and trends of the development
> - to give authors the opportunity to get paid even when their works were used
> the works of other authors and the copies of the works of other authors are
> for making money.
> Yes, you can add some other problems. But if to consider all this as a whole,
> see a contradiction between old-fashioned business and non-profit models (with
> their complicated legal restrictions to use content and with closed
> and social nature of the web with its growing speed of copying and sharing
> content in every corner of the Earth.
> 1. Licensing.
> I did not find a proper solution among the licensing models I saw. Maybe it is
> because they are not business, that normally must generate equivalent value
> its insiders and outsiders.
> These models declare some protection of copyright, but author can not see who
> and how uses his/her work legally. In my understanding it opposes free
> of content to the opportunity to commercialize it. Any restrictions to develop
> the works further (because author does not see the ways to get paid from this
> development) stop innovations and give rise to piracy and break copyright.
> Source movement for any sorts of content (source code, text, graphics, audio,
> video, etc.) would be more attractive for people if the mentioned problem will
> be solved.
> Also I consider copyright as a fundamental human right (for everyone) - it
> should not be even registered according the law of many countries. To be the
> right and since the web has not national borders a proper scheme relevant to
> this reality must be established to stop the war between content authors and
> users. Tell me who can win this war and why we must spend resources for legal
> "weapon" instead of legal peace?
> 2. News service.
> Big commercial media represent the fragmented picture of the events with the
> short term perspective and according their own policy - they are not about
> derivative works (how things go further). Citizen's journalism may look like
> big commercial media with one difference - displaying what big commercial
> usually refuse to display.
> 3. On-line sale.
> It is not about paying every author, whose works was used in the
> So, that is why I started developing the new licensing model (the Licence
> itself, the structure for its software implementation, the business model for
> partnership) with a use of my methods of structuring texts.
> One of the Licence's ideas, which I represent here, is to make the sequence of
> digital works (from the original work to the last derivative work and back)
> visible for everyone to decide where to connect with variants of use. Also I
> tried to combine free copying of works in any quantity, their free use for not
> making money and paid use for making money. Paid use means for authors the
> opportunity to get paid even when their works were used in the works of other
> authors and the copies of the works of these other authors are used for making
> I think this Licence may accelerate innovations because authors could focus on
> their works and be interested in their further development by other persons.
> The Licence v. 0.1 - http://tvl.ton.net.ru/Lic_ru_en_v01.pdf is not yet ready
> for use because it needs corrections, software and organizational
> infrastructure. It needs thinking people as well.
> Why not think about a precedent to establish a business, which could provide
> free global service for authors to assist them in creating innovative content
> and benefiting from it even if they have only knowledge and access to the web?
> am entirely open for any well-founded criticism, comments, suggestions and
> partnership to make it real. There are many variants to implement this. Let's
> talk via email or at my blog - http://jdnevnik.com/upravlenie .
> Link to this article - http://firstname.lastname@example.org:1
> Special thanks to Liza Wohlfart
> rid=724122 and Ed Mitchell
> rid=706152 , who explained me the need to transform my abstract
> to the article.
> Nikolai Krjachkov
More information about the License-discuss