Reply to comment

First off, another fine job - great analysis! You say, "I do not disagree that the trade-offs associated with derivative works, share-alike provisions, and non-commercial use are barriers to unrestricted use. However, as I don't feel that unrestricted use is the goal of the vast majority of users, the Creative Commons provisions seem a fair trade-off. For most users, accepting restrictions in areas that don't usually stand in the way of their use of the material seems a fair trade-off to freely access open content." This kind of pragmatism is, at the end of the day, the only way in which work moves forward. For all of Stallman's zeal, the free software movement was losing momentum in the late 1990s. All the zealots had been recruited, and others who thought the idea looked interesting couldn't stand to associate themselves with the religious fundamentalism. This is where the open source moniker came in, arguing for the same body of practices on practical benefit rather than disembodied principles. You also said, "I am guessing that read only access likely suits the needs of the vast majority of users." Really? I think this is an empirical question, and the right little research study could put some empirics behind your guess. Let me know if you want a collaborator. =)