Why I Chose a Creative Commons License

Off the Beat: Bruce Byfield's Blog
On April 10, I'm publishing a book called Designing with LibreOffice. The experience can be surreal, and some other time I've got to blog about incidents like my photo shoot, which was continually interrupted by a two by two line of ten year olds coming and going, or trying to plan a book launch menu that included vegetarian options and satisfied two different sets of allergies.
However, one of the most peculiar aspects is the congratulations I hear when I mention that the book will be published under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license. After all, the idea is hardly new. Besides, given my goals, what other choice do I have?
To start with, I am entering my thirteenth year of writing about free software several times per week. Under these circumstances, I would be rightly condemned as a hypocrite if I didn't use some sort of free license. If someone else didn't condemn me, I would -- which would be so much against my self-image that I'd do almost anything to avoid the inconsistency.
For another, I look at the publication as an experiment. I have always been intrigued by Neil Gaiman's comments on so-called piracy, in which he contends that a pirated copy is probably not a lost sale, since the reader probably wouldn't have bought anyway, and, more importantly, that piracy provides word-of-mouth advertising that helps sales in the long-term.
Of course, unlike Gaiman's work, my book is non-fiction, and a free download of a CC-licensed book is the dead opposite of piracy. However, considering that the publisher is hoping to make back costs by selling hard copies, from a business perspective, in both cases there is a concern about the relationship between free copies and sales. What, I wonder, will be the ratio of free downloads to paid copies? Will an increase in free downloads be followed some days later by an increase in hard copy sales?
Similarly, since there will be a tip jar below the download link, what proportion of the amount I might have earned from sales will be off-set by voluntary donations?
In other words, I am curious whether I can confirm Gaiman's observations. Naturally, I have no objection to sales, and I would like to see the publisher (Friends of Open Document Format) make back what is basically its expression of trust in me. However, I was paid a market-rate advance, and the Attribution part of the license means that I receive credit, that ultimate monetary unit in free software, so my curiosity is more disinterested than you might expect.
If nothing else, I can establish a base ratio of free copies to sales, and see if my next book is consistent with it. Also, should anyone ask me about using Creative Commons licenses, I can give them a data point, and not just an uninformed guess. With any luck, my experience may encourage someone else to use a free license.
Passing it forward
All these points matter a great deal to me. However, another major reason is that, with regular updates, "Designing with LibreOffice" could have a long shelf life. I have every intention of providing those updates for years to come, but accidents do happen. And who knows? As hubristic as it sounds, maybe three or four decades from now, something called LibreOffice will still exist, and users will still want to know how to design to typographic standards.
If, in a future that doesn't hold me, the book still has any value, I want to offer anyone who is interested the option of continuing to update it without being hampered by traditional copyright.
Meanwhile, neither the publisher nor I are likely to be able to afford a translation. If someone thinks the effort of producing a German or a Mandarin version is something they'd like to undertake, I don't want licensing to prevent the book being available for more people.
I would like to think I've written a useful book, full of information readers won't find elsewhere. If that is conceit, then my belief doesn't matter. However, if there is any shred of truth in my belief, I want what I started to go on being useful for as long as possible.
And that, more than anything else, is why I chose a Creative Commons Attribution- ShareAlike license. My choice of license gives the book a better chance of fulfilling my goals than traditional copyright ever could.
comments powered by DisqusSubscribe to our Linux Newsletters
Find Linux and Open Source Jobs
Subscribe to our ADMIN Newsletters
Support Our Work
Linux Magazine content is made possible with support from readers like you. Please consider contributing when you’ve found an article to be beneficial.

News
-
System76 Releases COSMIC Alpha 7
With scores of bug fixes and a really cool workspaces feature, COSMIC is looking to soon migrate from alpha to beta.
-
OpenMandriva Lx 6.0 Available for Installation
The latest release of OpenMandriva has arrived with a new kernel, an updated Plasma desktop, and a server edition.
-
TrueNAS 25.04 Arrives with Thousands of Changes
One of the most popular Linux-based NAS solutions has rolled out the latest edition, based on Ubuntu 25.04.
-
Fedora 42 Available with Two New Spins
The latest release from the Fedora Project includes the usual updates, a new kernel, an official KDE Plasma spin, and a new System76 spin.
-
So Long, ArcoLinux
The ArcoLinux distribution is the latest Linux distribution to shut down.
-
What Open Source Pros Look for in a Job Role
Learn what professionals in technical and non-technical roles say is most important when seeking a new position.
-
Asahi Linux Runs into Issues with M4 Support
Due to Apple Silicon changes, the Asahi Linux project is at odds with adding support for the M4 chips.
-
Plasma 6.3.4 Now Available
Although not a major release, Plasma 6.3.4 does fix some bugs and offer a subtle change for the Plasma sidebar.
-
Linux Kernel 6.15 First Release Candidate Now Available
Linux Torvalds has announced that the release candidate for the final release of the Linux 6.15 series is now available.
-
Akamai Will Host kernel.org
The organization dedicated to cloud-based solutions has agreed to host kernel.org to deliver long-term stability for the development team.