DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act), DRM (Digital Rights Management), and restrictive publication rights hurt everyone. The old guard, represented by companies like the RIAA and MPAA, believe that an artist’s profits are contained within a deeply policed realm. For years, we sat through momentary pauses at the beginning of video games, TV shows, and movies, while they advertise severe threats of financial harm via the FBI. Atmospheric numbers flashed and danced – jail time and a $250,000 fine may follow suit. With the industry’s sordid past, I wanted to take moment to explain why I’m choosing Creative Commons (CC).
What Is It?
Creative Commons is not about giving up your rights. As the creator of some art (motion, text, etc.), you hold the copyright for such documents. So how does CC fit in the picture?
CC sets an organized framework for others to use your material. If you believe that traditional copyright laws have hindered the distribution and modification of art, then this is for you.
Our free, easy-to-use copyright licenses provide a simple, standardized way to give the public permission to share and use your creative work — on conditions of your choice. (CC)
This flexibility will enable art and authoring to become a collaborative, building experience. CC is a non-profit organization tasked with maintaining the licenses and offering easy tools for others who want to join in and share.
I decided to make the plunge after reading the infamous editor of BoingBoing.net, Cory Doctorow, hailed the virtues of a Creative Commons license for major publications.
There’s no way to stop it, and the people who try end up doing more harm than piracy ever did. The record industry’s ridiculous holy war against file-sharers (more than 20,000 music fans sued and counting!) exemplifies the absurdity of trying to get the food-coloring out of the swimming pool. If the choice is between allowing copying or being a frothing bully lashing out at anything he can reach, I choose the former. (Cory Doctorow’s Little Brother)
Won’t You Lose Money?
Major corporations with multi-million dollar lobbying arms have long wanted to tamp down on piracy and sharing. The argument has been that copyright violations lead to less money in the coffers of big business.
A range of evidence suggests that piracy doesn’t hurt box office or overall earnings for the movie industry. In fact, in 2012, Hollywood set a box office record of more than $10 billion. Likewise, increasing evidence suggests that the largest pirates also fund the industry best. These are real fans. They go to live concerts, buy special packages, memorabilia, and go to events.
Is it possible I’ll lose money by allowing people to copy my work? Possibly, but I’m honored that somebody would’ve found something of interest to graft it from this site. If it helps others, why keep it locked down? The more people that are reached, helped, and find a ground to begin working on their finances, the better.
How Can I Try It?
At the bottom of my site, in the footer section, you’ll find a small logo for Creative Commons. If you click this small copyright notice, you’ll see that I allow the sharing (copying and distribution) and remix of my work on this site.
CC has one of the easiest ways to choose your copyright laws. Allow modifications? Allow commercial use? License jurisdiction? Then, select your license. The entire process takes less than two minutes.
This is a new direction for me. All I ask is that you think about trying it and give credit where credit is due.
Great post. My son has a YouTube channel where he does humorous animated parodies. Whenever anyone wants to use any of his material and do a mix of some sort, he always allows it. It’s always nice to see people ask permission, but even if they don’t, he’s extremely flattered, like you are. Kudos to you good sir! And have a superior day! 🙂
Thanks for the relevant comment, Kathy!
That’s a wonderful way for your son to handle this issue. Copying someones work is quite flattering – says it’s worth it. As long as you give the proper attribution, I’m pretty happy about it 🙂
You have a great day, as well.
-S.
I don’t mind if people use my work as long as they provide attribution. The problem I have is that most unscrupulous people don’t do that. It is the ones that just take my work and then put it up on their site as their own. That is the problem and creative commons doesn’t do anything about that. There will always be people wanting to not do the the work, unfortunately.
Debt Roundup,
You’re exactly right. People need to get used to providing attribution for work. I’m not sure that it’s always willful, though. I think some people don’t really “get it” and they graft an entire article (assuming that’s proper etiquette). Personally, if you’re copying and pasting (word-for-word) an article of mine onto your website, Google won’t like the behavior and the site will likely stay flat with regard to traffic.
Creative Commons does give a framework to build off of. That’s what excites me about the non-profit. They’re exceptionally educationally with their materials. For the general public, this can be a great tool for understanding copyright and becoming more flexible with certain policies.
Thanks for the thoughtful comment,
-S.
My thoughts pretty much echo what Grayson said.
Overall I’m a fan of Creative Commons, and I use it for all of the images on my site. Nice work Sam!
Nick,
Thanks so much! Glad that you support CC for images. Nice to know people that support these rights.
-S.
Good direction, but it is unfortunate that you’ve chosen the flawed NC license. It won’t help you in any way vs a simple CC-BY-SA license, but it will make it harder for your work to get noticed, used, built-upon — even if the uses people make are all non-commercial. That’s because NC material can’t be mixed with CC-BY-SA (the license used on Wikipedia). Result: nobody can ever do anything creative that mixes any Wikipedia stuff with your work or put Wikipedia stuff on your site or vice versa. There are other problems with NC too. See freedomdefined.org/Licenses/NC
Anyway, I’m not criticizing your concerns about commercial uses per se, but trying to bring to your attention that NC is a flawed license that doesn’t work as you might suspect. The approved Free Culture licenses are CC-BY and CC-BY-SA. Cheers
Aaron,
Really appreciate your comment and insight. I’ll have to look into this and consider a license change!
Thanks for your help,
-S.