The UK Arts Council funded this report into how UK artists are using Creative Commons licenses and their relationship to traditional copyright. The majority of those surveyed that were using CC licenses were using the "Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives" license (45%).
One of the conclusions of the report is that many creative individuals are not sure how to release their work with much confusion of what copyright and licensing means. Another interesting aspect of the report is looking at what "collaboration" really means. Most contributors to the report did not see the act of re-mixing, or using "found" footage, as any sort of collaboration with the original providers of content. What this means in terms of incentives for creators of re-use-able material in the long run is anyone's guess but it is a good reality check that "online community" can be anything but. It would be good to see a more independent report on CC licensing (the Open Business organisation help run CC UK) but worthwhile reading for anyone interested in this space.
In a historic move Sun has decided to release forthcoming Java technology under the GPL v2 free software license. This will enable Java to become more tightly integrated into free software releases like Linux distributions and will probably significently increase its viability in the long term. In an effort to alleviate concerns about free software "tainting" any proprietary licensed code (GPL software cannot legally be included within a codebase without the entire lot reverting to free software), Sun are putting their support into the GNU Classpath project which will allow free core class libraries to work in tandem with commercial software.
Don't you feel sorry for poor old YouTube? Now that they are officially on the culture vulture radar after a sensational deal with Google for US$1.65billion in stock the company is no longer alternative. They are also now a big fat target for lawsuits, and have been deluged by requests from content owners for their material to be removed from the site, or at least start sharing the pie. The process, the execs have discovered, is painful and goes a long way to explain why Internet mavericks like themselves have a bit of lead time to get a new model in place. The cost of clearing rights is cost-prohibitive. The cost of doing business as YouTube remains to be seen. With one source claiming up to 60% of the top 100 clips on YouTube have some form of copyright violation, it will be interesting to see what happens next. Rest assured, those heart-to-heart video blogs NOT sponsored by a media company will continue to flourish no doubt. Re-mixers may need more support.
YouTube Finds Signing Rights Deals Complex, Frustrating - WSJ.com