3 ms·

"By posting Content to the Service, you grant us the right and license to use, modify, publicly perform, publicly display, reproduce, and distribute such Conten

"By posting Content to the Service, you grant us the right and license to use, modify, publicly perform, publicly display, reproduce, and distribute such Content on and through the Service under a CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication. You are dedicating all Content you submit, post, or display to the public domain by waiving all of your rights to the work worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law. All others can copy, modify, distribute and perform the work, even for commercial purposes, all without asking for your permission." I'm afraid that last sentence did rather make me choke on my coffee. What is supposed to be the incentive for anyone to contribute to something like this?

pvaldes 3y ago
Have been there. Done. Next.
hnarn 3y ago
They are just describing what CC0 means. I really don’t understand the question, what is the “incentive” to contribute to anything? Some people just want to share their knowledge.
- logifail 3y ago
  I'm not minded to give away my time and effort creating then watch others - especially corporations - enrich themselves from my work. "Sharing" is something else.
  - hnarn 3y ago
    > I'm not minded to give away my time and effort creating then watch others - especially corporations - enrich themselves from my work. I'd be willing to bet that a lot of software that you use directly or indirectly every day would not exist had the authors shared your sentiment.
  - dspillett 3y ago
    The same could be said for just about any “public” database hosted by a commercial interest (or that might later be bought/sponsored by one). Using CC0 might seem a bit further reaching than some agreements, because you are giving rights to the users of the resource, not just giving the resource itself the rights it needs (plus some it wants, to be more cynical!) to reproduce your content, but it isn't massively different to CC-BY which I've seen used in similar circumstances (the difference being the attribution requirement) or CC-BY-SA as used by the StackExchange family of sites. > I'm not minded to… Which is fine. But many are happy to contribute without caring about the end use of the information. I generally much prefer something like CC-BY-NC myself, preferably later versions which have addressed the third-party copy-left troll issue, but I don't feel using CC0 is deserving of scorn at all. Without any licence explicitly stated, CC0 is pretty much what a lot of people would assume anyway (correctly or otherwise), and in this case a lot of what is being shared is going to be facts, rather than creative works, which are essentially public domain anyway (though I'm sure some corproates out there are busy lobbying to change that…). No one is forcing contributions. You spend your time, you takes your choice! Of course, you do right by yourself in making sure the licensing terms are to your taste before taking part, and are well advised to do so. > "Sharing" is something else. This is sharing, under very open terms. At least they are not claiming ownership, and the rights given are public not just to the site.
    - logifail 3y ago
      > many are happy to contribute without caring about the end use of the information Would we really call this "informed consent"? ... or it more likely that contributors either haven't read the licence agreement or have read it but haven't properly understand what it actually means? > This is sharing, under very open terms [..] Kind of like one way sharing? You give, they take?
      - barbs 3y ago
        > Kind of like one way sharing? You give, they take? Yes. There are plenty of examples of people sharing knowledge on the internet without expecting anything in return. Wikipedia, StackOverflow, and most open-source projects come to mind.

pvaldes 3y ago

Have been there. Done. Next.

hnarn 3y ago

They are just describing what CC0 means. I really don’t understand the question, what is the “incentive” to contribute to anything? Some people just want to share their knowledge.

logifail 3y ago
I'm not minded to give away my time and effort creating then watch others - especially corporations - enrich themselves from my work. "Sharing" is something else.
- hnarn 3y ago
  > I'm not minded to give away my time and effort creating then watch others - especially corporations - enrich themselves from my work. I'd be willing to bet that a lot of software that you use directly or indirectly every day would not exist had the authors shared your sentiment.
- dspillett 3y ago
  The same could be said for just about any “public” database hosted by a commercial interest (or that might later be bought/sponsored by one). Using CC0 might seem a bit further reaching than some agreements, because you are giving rights to the users of the resource, not just giving the resource itself the rights it needs (plus some it wants, to be more cynical!) to reproduce your content, but it isn't massively different to CC-BY which I've seen used in similar circumstances (the difference being the attribution requirement) or CC-BY-SA as used by the StackExchange family of sites. > I'm not minded to… Which is fine. But many are happy to contribute without caring about the end use of the information. I generally much prefer something like CC-BY-NC myself, preferably later versions which have addressed the third-party copy-left troll issue, but I don't feel using CC0 is deserving of scorn at all. Without any licence explicitly stated, CC0 is pretty much what a lot of people would assume anyway (correctly or otherwise), and in this case a lot of what is being shared is going to be facts, rather than creative works, which are essentially public domain anyway (though I'm sure some corproates out there are busy lobbying to change that…). No one is forcing contributions. You spend your time, you takes your choice! Of course, you do right by yourself in making sure the licensing terms are to your taste before taking part, and are well advised to do so. > "Sharing" is something else. This is sharing, under very open terms. At least they are not claiming ownership, and the rights given are public not just to the site.
  - logifail 3y ago
    > many are happy to contribute without caring about the end use of the information Would we really call this "informed consent"? ... or it more likely that contributors either haven't read the licence agreement or have read it but haven't properly understand what it actually means? > This is sharing, under very open terms [..] Kind of like one way sharing? You give, they take?
    - barbs 3y ago
      > Kind of like one way sharing? You give, they take? Yes. There are plenty of examples of people sharing knowledge on the internet without expecting anything in return. Wikipedia, StackOverflow, and most open-source projects come to mind.