Creative Commons Add-In for Office Released

Ctrl+Alt+De1337 writes "Creative Commons has announced the release of an add-in to Microsoft Office that allows the easy addition of a CC license to files created with Word, PowerPoint, or Excel. It was co-developed by Microsoft and Creative Commons and only works in Office XP and Office 2003. It can be downloaded from Microsoft's download center after a validation check, and CNet has a screenshot available of the tool."

Comments

Why do you need an add-in?

[ThinkingInBinary]

Why would you want a "Creative Commons tool" for Office? Wouldn't it just be easier to add a page after the title page, like the copyright page, but instead explaining the license of the document? Why do you need a program to do it for you?

What would be far more useful would be a way to tag Creative Commons documents in web pages, and then if some search engine (Google? please?) would explicitly label Creative Commons results as such, and encourage people to listen to, view, combine, mash up (shudder), and otherwise use them.

Re:Why do you need an add-in?

[ReverendLoki]

I for one can see how this would be useful. You see, there isn't one set of terms and conditions, but rather there's a whole range of possible conditions applicable under Creative Commons licensing.

What this looks like is pretty much a wizard that asks you how you would like to allow your work to be used, and then generates the CC license for those conditions. Although a nice add on, it really doesn't look all that complicated. I'm hoping it isn't long until someone makes a good wizard for OpenOffice.org as well.

Re:Why do you need an add-in?

[monomania]

"What would be far more useful would be a way to tag Creative Commons documents in web pages, and then if some search engine (Google? please?) would explicitly label Creative Commons results as such..."

There is; on the web badge code, the following (or, depending on the license, something similar) is encapsulated:

<rdf:RDF xmlns="http://web.resource.org/cc/"
        xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
        xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax -ns#">
<Work rdf:about="">
<license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/2.5/" />
</Work>
<License rdf:about="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 2.5/">
      <requires rdf:resource="http://web.resource.org/cc/Attributi on" />
      <permits rdf:resource="http://web.resource.org/cc/Reproduct ion" />
      <permits rdf:resource="http://web.resource.org/cc/Distribut ion" />
      <permits rdf:resource="http://web.resource.org/cc/Derivativ eWorks" />
      <requires rdf:resource="http://web.resource.org/cc/Notice" />
</License>
</rdf:RDF>

It's up to the browser/search engine/application as to what is done with it.

Re:Why do you need an add-in?

[Geoffreyerffoeg]

then if some search engine (Google? please?) would explicitly label Creative Commons results as such

From advanced search:

Return results that are:
- not filtered by license
- free to use or share
- free to use or share, even commercially
- free to use share or modify
- free to use, share or modify, even commercially
More info

Why should they need to?

[Manip]

There is something very wrong with our copyright system when people have to attach a licence to all media they create in order for others to use it... Perhaps I should start wearing a badge that reads "Your eyes and ears have permission to consume my copyright material (e.g. My voice, and face."

Why isn't media created free/public domain unless its creator wants it protected? ... ?

Re:Why should they need to?

[Ctrl Alt De1337]

If you don't attach a license with your work anyone can do anything with it without you being able to do anything about it.

This is the exact opposite of what the law says. If you create an original work of any kind, whether or not you register it with the copyright office it is still copyrighted to you and no one can do anything with it without your permission. If you don't put a license on it, then it is assumed that you are reserving all of your rights not waiving all of your rights.

Re:it is a crock off shit

[nuzak]

God forbid that Microsoft should encourage anyone to use their own product or anything. Such a shame that no one is able to write CC-covered material with any other product anymore, thanks to the exclusive arrangement that CC no doubt made with Microsoft.

Re:What's the point

[Keeper]

What's the point of posting on a website not under your control?

That screenshot is a fake!

[garcia]

CNet has a screenshot available of the tool.

That screenshot looks nothing like Ballmer!

Re:What's the point

[Trevahaha]

Because you're licensing the content not the format it's presented in. People generally copyright the text on a website or inside a book, not that the book was printed on white paper using a serif font or that your website is running on Apache or IIS.

You know why?

[slashflood]

It is there to get you used to the idea of DRM. It is actually part of the DRM system integrated in Office. Sooner or later, users will be presented with a far more complex DRM tool to choose an appropriate license and protection scheme. Standard users are protective about their ideas, thoughts and works. If they are asked by Office, if they want to share it with the rest of the world or put a restrictive license and protection on their creation, they'll click on "It is mine, my IP, nobody else should reuse it".

I really think this is only just the beginning of a broader DRM tool.