Dvorak's article screams pessimism. He uses meaningless rhetoric and personal opinion as an attempt to refute a positive organization. He misses the whole point of CC, because, as his article says, he doesn't understand it! His labeling of elitism and trendiness discredits every point he attempts to make in the article.
In his argument regarding public domain, he fails to address the point that CC functions as a centralized information center and explanation of such a licensing system. The entire point is to inform individuals that your work can be used in such a manner without the author's permission. This is all explicitly stated on nearly every page of the site! The concept of public domain is not common knowledge to most individuals who have no experience with US copyright law. Creative Commons provides a simple and effective way to inform people about said accessibility.
He's being an elitist himself by negating a system that promotes open Democracy!
What do typical non-tech savvy individuals consider as "safe". Are we talking about the neo conservative Christians who don't want their kids having access to pornography and profanity online? (too lazy to install a browsing filter) Or are we talking about the people who are too incompetent to install firefox, a firewall and adware removal program because they can't browse without getting malicious programs or pop ups on their PC!?
I can't count the number of people that I know personally, and meet on a regular basis, who fall into the latter category. I spend ridiculous amounts of time helping out my parents and friends who can't comprehend these ideas. I don't disgust it by any means, and love to help others, but when are people going to figure these simple things out on their own!?
Slashdot Mirror
http://xdev.narod.ru/tagscan_e.htm Tag Scanner is a great full-featured T&R application.
Dvorak's article screams pessimism. He uses meaningless rhetoric and personal opinion as an attempt to refute a positive organization. He misses the whole point of CC, because, as his article says, he doesn't understand it! His labeling of elitism and trendiness discredits every point he attempts to make in the article. In his argument regarding public domain, he fails to address the point that CC functions as a centralized information center and explanation of such a licensing system. The entire point is to inform individuals that your work can be used in such a manner without the author's permission. This is all explicitly stated on nearly every page of the site! The concept of public domain is not common knowledge to most individuals who have no experience with US copyright law. Creative Commons provides a simple and effective way to inform people about said accessibility. He's being an elitist himself by negating a system that promotes open Democracy!
Thought you all would enjoy this. Full resolution AP photo of the catfish. http://ftp2.nationalgeographic.com/pressroom/GIANT %20CATFISH/GiantCatfish.jpg
What do typical non-tech savvy individuals consider as "safe". Are we talking about the neo conservative Christians who don't want their kids having access to pornography and profanity online? (too lazy to install a browsing filter) Or are we talking about the people who are too incompetent to install firefox, a firewall and adware removal program because they can't browse without getting malicious programs or pop ups on their PC!? I can't count the number of people that I know personally, and meet on a regular basis, who fall into the latter category. I spend ridiculous amounts of time helping out my parents and friends who can't comprehend these ideas. I don't disgust it by any means, and love to help others, but when are people going to figure these simple things out on their own!?