Quoting David Woolley (for...@david-woolley.me.uk): > It gets political by the second word of the full form of CC! Common > ownership of intellectual property is definitely a political goal.
1. Nigel's claim was merely that the CC-BY-SA licence itself was apolitical. 2. Interpreting the _organisation's_ name in a daftly literalist way is IMO unconstructive in this context: Despite what 'commons' traditionally means in law, the Creative Commons organisation neither aspires to common ownership nor achieves it. Like much else in real life, there's a metaphor involved. > A more complete manifesto can be found in > <http://creativecommons.org/about/reform>. Which would be irrelevant to Nigel's point. _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss