<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<essay xml:lang="en" version="5.0" xmlns="http://docbook.org/ns/docbook" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" xmlns:gal="http://norman.walsh.name/rdf/gallery#" xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/">
<info>
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
<title>Code. Images. Words. Baby.</title><biblioid class="uri">http://norman.walsh.name/2006/09/21/codeImagesWordsBaby</biblioid>
<volumenum>9</volumenum>
<issuenum>87</issuenum>
<pubdate>2006-09-21T12:55:23-04:00</pubdate>
<date>$Date: 2006-09-21 16:45:23 -0400 (Thu, 21 Sep 2006) $</date>
<author>
      <personname>
<firstname>Norman</firstname>
	<surname>Walsh</surname>
</personname>
    </author>
<copyright>
      <year>2006</year>
      <holder>Norman Walsh</holder>
    </copyright>
<abstract>
<para>Thoughts on licensing my code, images, and words.
</para>
</abstract>
<dc:subject rdf:resource="http://norman.walsh.name/knows/taxonomy#TheWeb"/>
</info>

<para xml:id="p1">In considering
<personname>
      <firstname>Mark</firstname>
      <surname>Pilgrim</surname>
    </personname>’s
<link xlink:href="http://diveintomark.org/archives/2006/09/15/cc-by-nc">recent essay</link>
about the “non-commercial” clause in the
<link xlink:href="http://wiki.creativecommons.org/">Creative Commons</link> license,
<foaf:name>Tim Bray</foaf:name>
<link xlink:href="http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2006/09/19/Licensing-Modes">wonders</link>
if the fact that he feels differently about code and non-code makes him weird.</para>

<para xml:id="p2">I don't think so. And I'll tell you why. Or, at least, I'll tell
you why <emphasis>I</emphasis> feel differently about code and
non-code.</para>

<para xml:id="p3">When I sit down to write code, I bring a certain set of skills,
a certain amount of experience, and a certain quality of gray stuff
between my ears. Presented with a problem that can be solved by a
<wikipedia page="SMOP">simple matter of programming</wikipedia> and
sufficient time, I can probably craft a solution. Coding is mostly an
engineering exercise. There are any number of other bit pushers out
there that could also solve the problem.</para>

<para xml:id="p4">Giving away code is, in some sense, giving away nothing more
than time and convenience. There are lots of reasons to do this, the
least egocentric being that I want the convenience and benefit of
using other programmer's time. The more I share, the more others will,
or at least that's the theory.</para>

<para xml:id="p5">When I sit down to write words or I take a photograph, I'm engaged
in something different: it's fundamentally not like writing code. To
the extent that I'm writing facts or photographing public events, you
could find someone else to write the facts or photograph the events,
but <emphasis>no one else</emphasis> could write my words or take my
photographs.</para>

<para xml:id="p6">And that makes me more possessive about those things.</para>

<para xml:id="p7">That said, Mark's arguments are compelling. I may drop the “NC”
clause from my Creative Commons licensing. I'm going to have to think
about it some more.</para>

<para xml:id="p8">[With apologies to <personname>
      <firstname>Gwen</firstname>
<surname>Stefani</surname>
    </personname> for
<wikipedia page="Love._Angel._Music._Baby.">the title</wikipedia>.—ed]</para>

</essay>

