On Wed, 21 Jan 2009, Jason Reusch wrote: > > ----- "Evan Prodromou" <[email protected]> wrote: > > | I sympathize with those people who say that everything should be out > | in > | the open. But I don't feel like it's my decision to make, for those > | folks who do want to have control over who reads what they're doing. > > By agreeing that your submissions are licensed under creative commons at > registration time, aren't you effectively forfeiting any expectation of > privacy anyway? Although any one federated, or internal and private, install > doesn't necessarily have to require CC for user submissions. Certain privacy > features may only make sense in non-federated servers. >
No. Privacy and Copyright are two separate issues that should not be conflated. I can have an All Rights Reserved webpage that anyone can see and I can also have a CC:BY internal wiki that only I and my partner are allowed to view with the understanding that it is private information. Example: I have seen more and more people now putting a "This email is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution license" in their email signature. Now, if you receive an email from someone with their that in their signature but the contents of the email was their Social Security Number (say, you were their boss) there would be an implied understanding that the email is meant to be, and kept, private. The question of _why_ someone would license something they want to be private under a permissive license is another question. But they are not intrinsicly contradictory. Best, Greg _______________________________________________ Laconica-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.laconi.ca/mailman/listinfo/laconica-dev
