Works under Creative Commons

[popltree2]

So, I am planning on releasing a book I am writing, a chapter at a time, online for free distribution under Creative Commons . However, when I am done writing it, I would like to be able to publish this work when I am done and be able to (possibly) make some money off of it. Does anyone know if, by agreeing to the terms of CC, I am waiving my right to redistribute my own content for commercial use?

[ryudo]

Not sure about this CC place but have you ever heard of Lulu?

http://www.lulu.com/

[rokov]

Releasing under Creative Commons only limits what others can do with your work, not what you can. Jonathan Coultan releases all of his songs under Creative Commons and still sells mp3s and cds.

[comhcinc]

So, I am planning on releasing a book I am writing, a chapter at a time, online for free distribution under Creative Commons . However, when I am done writing it, I would like to be able to publish this work when I am done and be able to (possibly) make some money off of it. Does anyone know if, by agreeing to the terms of CC, I am waiving my right to redistribute my own content for commercial use?

you are waiving your right to any type of exclusive deal. you still hold the copy right and you can still publish if you want but, it would be less likely for a publisher to pick up your book.

check out the video "CC+: Creative Commons and Commerce" at http://support.creativecommons.org/videos/

[popltree2]

Not sure about this CC place but have you ever heard of Lulu?

http://www.lulu.com/

I don't know that I had heard of that company in particular, but I do know about self-publishing. I was looking into that as a possible avenue for exposure more than profit.

[ryudo]

I don't know that I had heard of that company in particular, but I do know about self-publishing. I was looking into that as a possible avenue for exposure more than profit.

I first heard about it on twit awhile back and how some of his friends did it and he used to plug it for a while.
I am thinking this will be the way I will go with my stories and try and convince my mom with her books and stories to be done.


:)

[popltree2]

you are waiving your right to any type of exclusive deal. you still hold the copy right and you can still publish if you want but, it would be less likely for a publisher to pick up your book.

check out the video "CC+: Creative Commons and Commerce" at http://support.creativecommons.org/videos/

Just the info I was looking for. Thanks.

[tokenuser]

I don't know that I had heard of that company in particular, but I do know about self-publishing. I was looking into that as a possible avenue for exposure more than profit.Lulu has an interesting backstory.... the guy that founded Red Hat Linux realised that he had a ton of user manuals in storage and thought "what if we had an on-demand publishing system". And thus came lulu.

[comhcinc]

Just the info I was looking for. Thanks.
no problem, i am in the middle of doing a project on copyright and creative commons for school at this very moment. my head is full on the stuff.

[ariastar]

Lulu. That's what we sometimes call Dumb-dumb, I mean, Luthien.

[ericjosepi]

Everything I've ever done musically is under CC but I still plan on releasing it through CDbaby into iTunes and also in CD form someday too... Also the latest 2 NIN discs Trent has put out under CC as well... But then again, he's on a much larger scale than all of us and can afford such things.

[samureye]

Lulu has an interesting backstory.... the guy that founded Red Hat Linux realised that he had a ton of user manuals in storage and thought "what if we had an on-demand publishing system". And thus came lulu.
Then he made a cartoon?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voaRNOn9bSI

[masherscf]

The answer is no. None of the current versions of Creative Commons contains any language where you implicitly surrender the copyright of your work. This bullshit about you surrendering copyright through creative commons is a misinterpretation by online content thieves.

However, the creative commons does not protect you either. If you are going to publish the work later for cash or you want the ability to protect your copyright with the full force of the law, you should register your copyright.

The creative commons license is not designed to protect the artist. The artist always as the full force of copyright law protecting them. The creative commons license is just a mutually understood framework whereby you grant a license for someone to use your artwork and the conditions for legal use. The creative commons only protects the licensee, not the artist.

If someone is going to steal your work anyway, the creative commons offers no protection not already supplied by copyright statutes.

That is, there's no reason to issue any CC-license at all unless you have a target audience that might actually use it within the boundaries of the license. (ie, make copies of the manuscript, give them to their buddies)

If someone violates the creative commons license, your remedy is to sue under the customary copyright law. The person may claim protection under the creative common's license. However, if the person is in violation, the license is automatically voided.

If someone uses your work in a manner consistent with the creative commons. You wouldn't be able to sue them. However, you don't surrender the copyright. CC is just s license, not a gift.

[rabidbadger]

wow. facinating, masher.

Makes it sound like CC is all just "let's pretend" Hmm. I think I'll stick with (c) from now on.

[masherscf]

wow. facinating, masher.

Makes it sound like CC is all just "let's pretend" Hmm. I think I'll stick with (c) from now on.

It's not pretend. CC was never intended to protect your artwork. The purpose of CC is to make it easier to share your material. The problem with sharing is that legitimate media won't touch your work without some sort of license. Copyright law is written to favor the copyright holders...usually the major media companies who wrote the law. The concept of fair use has been pretty severely eroded. The result is that artists can be pretty well protected as long as they register their work...and have a good lawyer.

It doesn't sound cool or all web 2.0, but it's your right as an artist.

[rabidbadger]

Yeah, I guess it's an added layer of support. Never hurts. Just cya.

[popltree2]

Wow! So much useful info here, especially from you, Masher. CC has always seemed a bit symbolic to me. One is embracing the mentality of sharing one's content without expectation of compensation. It seems more like the content creator is saying "Don't worry, it's okay to take my work and spread it around. I am not going to come after you with lawyers."

[bigshotprof]

This might help.

http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Podcasting_Legal_Guide