The Creative Commons: Beyond the Self
Those who understand the creative commons concept don't view copyright as simply a means for an author to benefit financially. That is, they understand there are people motivated by intrinsic reward rather than the maximization of profit. People recognizing that creativity is dependent upon the availability of what was created before them. People recognizing that ALL RIGHTS RESERVED is not necessarily the best defaulting legal structure to fulfill the purpose and provision of American constitutional copyright. Or simply, people concluding that the actual forfeiting of some rights to the public may, in the long run, produce more benefit for the author.
But then there are those looking just one way. Seeing just one thing. Pointed in one particular direction. Staring down a tunnel. With his eyes on the 'prize', John C. Dvorak proclaims -
"That's what's bothersome. Creative Commons trying to insert itself as another layer into a system that already protects content developers like me to an extreme. I mean my grandkids will own all my writing exclusively until 75 years after I'm dead, unless I sell all the rights to someone else. What more do I want from copyright?"I don't know John, what do you want?
I know what I want John. I want you to read Tom Merritt's article then write him an email of thanks for calmly understating that you were simply "asking what good the Creative Commons serves". If I didn't know any better John, your article seemed more an attack than a matter of inquiry.