The first set of copyright licenses was released in December 2002

Creative Commons can be relied upon to take a generally pro-ownership and libertarian stance regarding rules and regulation

“Use and adapt for free, credit the author” rather than using a shorthand of CC BY or even the full name of the license

l’usage des licences est très approximatif. Il nous est arrivé de trouver un même cours ayant de multiples licences, contradictoires, posées par les auteurs, l’Université et l’annuaire lui-même. Ce qui en pratique rend impossible son utilisation autrement qu’en simple document à consulter : on est alors très loin des REL.

Review this chart that details which CC licenses work well for education resources and which do not.

activités de formation

How do you see Creative Commons and licensing affecting teaching and learning in K-12 or higher ed?

LAST YEAR Flickr, a photo-sharing site, announced it would cut its free storage from 1 terabyte (more than 200,000 images) to just to 1,000 items. Starting this month, many users may find that their content is in danger of being deleted.

Flickr Commons photos will not be deleted. Anything uploaded with a CC license before November 1, 2018, won’t be deleted, but users will need to upgrade to Pro to upload more than 1,000 photos or videos.

Discuss?

Thoughts on Licensing

On Attribution vs Privilege of CC0

Not Even Attribution

Zero Is My Hero (CC0)

in economically developing societies, small scale proprietary educational institutions often serve the poor more successfully than public institutions do

Consequently, the SA condition does not apply to your contributions to modified works including these kinds of changes.

In other words, the CC licenses (all of which include the BY condition) enable the creator of a work to prohibit you from attributing them. However, except in the extremely rare cases where the creator explicitly prohibits you from attributing them, you are always required to attribute the creator of a work shared under a CC BY license.

most of all, re-establishes education as a force for equity and social mobility — and I think open licensing is a crucial piece of that equation.I’m not content, though, with open licensing being the extent of our vision, and I hope many others feel the same way.

is the Creative Commons really a commons? According to its website, Creative Commons defines the spectrum of possibilities between full copyright - all rights reserved - and the public domain - no rights reserved. Our licenses help you keep your copyright while inviting certain uses of your work - a “some rights reserved” copyright. The point is clear: Creative Commons exists to help “you,” the producer, keep control of “your” work. You are invited to choose among a range of restrictions you wish to apply to “your” work, such as forbidding duplication, forbidding derivative works, or forbidding commercial use. It is assumed that as an author-producer everything you make and everything you say is your property. The right of the consumer is not mentioned, nor is the distinction between producers and consumers of culture disputed. Creative Commons legitimates, rather than denies, producer-control and enforces, rather than abolishes, the distinction between producer and consumer. It expands the legal framework for producers to deny consumers the possibility to create use-value or exchange-value out of the common stock.