MJ Ray mjr@phonecoop.coop writes:
Isn't it approving CC's chequered history and future a little?
It's endorsing CC.
Endorsing CC isn't a big problem nowadays because they got rid of the licences which didn't allow non-commercial sharing. They now have a set of "baseline" rights that all their licences must give: http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Baseline_Rights
Saying that it endorses CC's history is going too far, and it's not clear what that would mean. Would it be having bad licences in the past? (booo) Would it be removing the bad licences from their repertoire? (yaay)
BTW, while searching for that link, I also found Lessig's comments: http://lessig.org/blog/2008/11/enormously_important_news_from.html
(lessig.org isn't working for me, here's a mirror) http://www.strategist.org.uk/politics/enormously-important-news-from-the-fre...
And a blog entry on the front of creativecommons.org: http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/10443
And CC's "statement of intent" earlier this year regarding the SA licences: http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC_Attribution-ShareAlike_Intent (long, didn't read)