Sorry for delayed replying I agreed with decision of CC community , and I think we should not change the names of licenses ,especially after widespread use of those licenses , just I wanted to say there are other people have similar objections to what I had.
I liked your idea about using adjectives in Arabic for licenses names, it seems logical. I wrote my notices about translation during Jordan and Egyptian translation process, you can find it here https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!topic/cc-egypt/q9HheNbrGPY On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 4:26 AM, Sami Al-Abdrabbuh <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi Hasna and all, > > I agree that it is a legitimate argument. Though I might see that there is > might be multiple levels of 'commons-ality' to a product. > > So there should be a 'commons' attribute in the license . wither this > 'commons' attribute is in how is it open for the common public to re-sell > it, or change into it. I see what they mentioned about the spectrum of > openness > here is very good illustration <https://creativecommons.org/examples>. > We could be very radical and say 'Mashaa' is not really applicable for > anything other than to the public domain (cco). And anything is > conservative. but as we could have adjectives in Arabic I would say it is > still legitimate to claim that there is products that are : > > - مشاعُ التعديل > - مشاعُ التربّح > - مشاع العزو > - مشاع > > Where the last one is the ultimate commons .. everything in it us common , > arguably that's what an open domain is. > > I haven't the chance to see your previous objections, but I would be > curious to know them. And know what alternative naming would you see is > more relevant. > > > > > Sami > > On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 9:24 AM, Sadeek Hasna <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> just I remembered, when I objected to translate word “commons “in English >> to "Mashaa" in Arabic, because it does not give true meaning in Arabic and >> for other reasons. >> >> in this article some people made same object, which I made in past, even >> for original word "commons", according to them they said " it should stop >> offering NC and ND licenses in future versions of our license suite because >> these licenses do not create a true commons of open content that everyone >> is free to use, redistribute, remix, and repurpose. " >> >> http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/40144 >> >> but The CC community refuse to stop offering the NC or ND in further >> licenses or change their names. >> >> -- >> لقد تلقيت هذه الرسالة لأنك مشترك في المجموعة "CC Arab World المشاع >> الإبداعي" من مجموعات Google. >> لإلغاء اشتراكك في هذه المجموعة وإيقاف تلقي رسائل إلكترونية منها، أرسِل >> رسالة إلكترونية إلى [email protected]. >> للنشر في هذه المجموعة، أرسل بريدًا إلكترونيًا إلى >> [email protected] >> انتقل إلى هذه المجموعة على http://groups.google.com/group/cc-arab-world. >> للمزيد من الخيارات، انتقل إلى https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> > > -- لقد تلقيت هذه الرسالة لأنك مشترك في المجموعة "CC Arab World المشاع الإبداعي" من مجموعات Google. لإلغاء اشتراكك في هذه المجموعة وإيقاف تلقي رسائل إلكترونية منها، أرسِل رسالة إلكترونية إلى [email protected]. للنشر في هذه المجموعة، أرسل بريدًا إلكترونيًا إلى [email protected] انتقل إلى هذه المجموعة على http://groups.google.com/group/cc-arab-world. للمزيد من الخيارات، انتقل إلى https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
