[JoPP-Public] Fw: Your journal application to DOAJ: Journal of Peer Production

Sat Aug 19 11:21:34 CEST 2017

I completely agree with Stefano. I want to add an explanation to Mathieu:

Am 19.08.2017 um 04:50 schrieb Mathieu ONeil:
> To sum up: one license (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 AU) does not allow commercial
> use or derivatives (better for authors?), the other (CC BY 4.0) does
> (better for the Cause?)

If the purpose is to prevent commercial use and simultaneouly keep
freedom of sharing, then CC BY-SA, the most restrictive free cultural
license, is the best choice, NOT NC. Why? Share-alike means that the
commercial user itself has to use SA which conficts with keeping content
scarce to make money of it (especially when published offline). NC
explicitly prevents commercial use but at the same time sharing in a lot
of areas. And commercial use is a wide notion which applies to books as
well as to blogs with adds on it.

Concluding, I would prefer CC0, since I find commercial use okay beause
it spreads content, and thats my aim. We live in capitalism, and thats
the way it goes. Second best is CC-BY. Third would be CC BY-SA.
Everything below that is neither useful nor acceptable - for me :-)

Best,
Stefan

-- 
Start here: www.meretz.de
OpenPGP-ID: 0x1D4BB160