Licensing The Geocachers Creed

1k · February 8, 2005

Those of us who are maintaining the Geocachers' Creed obtained a Creative Commons license for it. The license says:

You are free to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work under the following conditions:

Attribution. You must give the original author credit.

Noncommercial. You may not use this work for commercial purposes.

No Derivative Works. You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work.

Any of these conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder.

Your fair use and other rights are in no way affected by the above.

In other words, people can copy, display or distribute the Creed in any form whatsoever for noncommerical purposes as long as they credit the source and preserve it's wording.

The rationale for selecting these conditions, drawn from participants in the forums, is:

1) Attibution: Since there is no one "author", attibution would be to www.geocreed.info, so that the nature of the Creed and it's development is not lost in the distribution of it.

2) Noncommercial: Those of us maintaining the Creed will generally grant permission for others to reproduce and sell the Creed (you don't need permission to reproduce and give it away) if requested, and there's an email address on the Creed website for making such requests. However, we feel this condition gives us some control over inappropriate commercial uses of the Creed.

3) No derivative work: Allows us to maintain a "master" copy of the Creed, subject to periodic revisions, that reflects a consensus of geocachers, versus allowing the creation of multiple versions of the Creed that may or may not represent geocachers in general.

A geocacher recently argued that we should drop the noncommercial and no derivative works conditions (i.e. retain just the attribution condition), so that those in the geocaching community are free to do what they want with the Creed.

In the spirit of the Creed's development, we'd like to know what other members of the community think - is this license too restrictive, or are the protections listed above appropriate?

Edited February 8, 2005 by Kai Team

February 8, 2005

I'll jump right in on this. I don't see that license as too restrictive, it basically gives a user permission to employ good, common sense in how they use the creed. It says that the licensee is placing a degree of trust in 'cachers. I hope no one abuses that.

2k · February 8, 2005

Ah! It's the GNU type license! I can't tell you what a pain that is with our legal dept at work!

9.4k · February 8, 2005

Yes. I'm afraid that this may be too restrictive for use on the Geocaching.com web site, but I'm sure that many orgs won't care.

1k · February 8, 2005

Yes. I'm afraid that this may be too restrictive for use on the Geocaching.com web site, but I'm sure that many orgs won't care.

Would you explain why it may be too restrictive to use on the geocaching.com website (edit: i.e. which clause is too restrictive)?

Edited February 8, 2005 by Kai Team

7.2k · February 8, 2005

Yes and no.

I can see the reasoning behind some of the restrictions, however, it's been pointed out to me two things that go against what I had envisioned.

Non-commercial: Prevents someone from printing up the Creed onto to some business cards and selling them. Cafepress is a popular spot for creating stuff to sell. I think it would be nice if The Creed was put on a mug or something.

No Derivitive Work: I agree that the main tenets should not be changed without "official approval," but the examples, from the beginning, was meant to be non-site specific and allow a site to add or clarify points as it relates to their own site. e.g. "Obtain permission from the originator ... placing a cache close to another." could be added to with "Here on mycachelistingsite.com we prefer 528' separations."

As long as it is clear what changes have been made to the examples and not try to rewrite the Creed, I don't have a have a problem with it.

So, yes, I do think the license needs to be looked at.

BTW, thanks to Scout of gpsgames.org for pointing these out.

1.1k · February 8, 2005

And people complain about GC.com being anal. Why did you have ot get your copy right of this. I am glad it is JUST a hobbie.

Cheers

2.3k · February 8, 2005

Yes. I'm afraid that this may be too restrictive for use on the Geocaching.com web site, but I'm sure that many orgs won't care.

Would you explain why it may be too restrictive to use on the geocaching.com website (edit: i.e. which clause is too restrictive)?

If it were me and I had questions of this nature from a site or two I would email them and not ask this question in a public forum.

February 8, 2005

Yes. I'm afraid that this may be too restrictive for use on the Geocaching.com web site, but I'm sure that many orgs won't care.

Would you explain why it may be too restrictive to use on the geocaching.com website (edit: i.e. which clause is too restrictive)?

If it were me and I had questions of this nature from a site or two I would email them and not ask this question in a public forum.

Great Play!

Jeremy put the volleyball up, Kai went for it, and CO slammed it in his face. Exellent sportsmanship!

20.7k · February 8, 2005

I'm also curious as to why copyright protection would be needed for this.

1.6k · February 8, 2005

If this is copyrighted, and it seems it has a Creative Commons license now, then I want a cut of all royalties to go to geocaching, if not to myself, as many of us made substantive contributions to the geocaching creed and should get usage as co-producers and a cut of all returns on this.

Since it was developed using GC's resources and as GC is well known as a private company since at least the days of its own copyright flame wars over the geocaching logo, they should get a cut for providing resources to enable to principal authors to put this together via their forums.

In other words, a good lawyer with nothing else to do should be able to punch a bunch of holes through it.

I wouldn't get too worried about the CCL as this is basically an agreement as to authorship and fair use. It is actionable, but like a regular copyright, its just a ticket to file lawsuits, not to win them. It is an increasingly common form when the use and the form of the IP is to be protected, but the authors can't or don't want to worry about getting paid for it (scientific journals are copyrighted, clinical teaching materials are CCL'd). In this case, it would be very near impossible to make money on it, and the line of people who contributed to it and want to get paid for their work is very long and very well documented, thus any money that did get made would disappear into a flurry of lawyers.

1.4k · February 8, 2005

The license actually seems to be at this link:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/legalcode

Which is far more extensive than the "human readable format"

I dunno. To me the creed is like the Gx logo. It came out of the community and should be in the public domain. The Gx logo is made into many derivative works, incorporated into much club gear and other stuff.

Attribution is cool, but I don't think you'd want to restrict the use and adoption of code by insisting that derivative works and/or products with it on it are not allowed.

20.7k · February 8, 2005

I'm very glad that I ignored most of the threads on the creed. I thought it was a silly process before, now even more so.

Edited February 8, 2005 by sbell111

1.2k · February 8, 2005

I still fail to see how a creed created by a few of the few people who visit the forums can think that it represents the many who do not visit the forums. Its like a small town high school tennis team deciding on the rules of conduct for all tennis players all over the world and then trying to convince the rest of the world that they are the one true word?

I'm sorry but I'm confused over the whole concept and this latest bit only adds to the confusion.

Edited February 8, 2005 by LaPaglia

1.4k · February 8, 2005

Ditto.

5.7k · February 8, 2005

I still fail to see how a creed created by a few of the few people who visit the forums can think that it represents the many who do not visit the forums. Its that like a small town high school tennis team deciding on the rules of conduct for all tennis players all over the world and then trying to convince the rest of the world that they are the one true word?

But what if it's the best high school tennis team in the world, and could kick Stanford's butt in a team match? Can't we use a coffee analogy? I understand those better. :rolleyes:

--Marky

1.2k · February 8, 2005

I still fail to see how a creed created by a few of the few people who visit the forums can think that it represents the many who do not visit the forums. Its that like a small town high school tennis team deciding on the rules of conduct for all tennis players all over the world and then trying to convince the rest of the world that they are the one true word?

But what if it's the best high school tennis team in the world, and could kick Stanford's butt in a team match? Can't we use a coffee analogy? I understand those better.

--Marky

OK so the high school tennis team is drinking coffee and decide to write rules of conduct for all the coffee drinking tennis players in the world, Professional and amateur. I'm still not sure they have their finger on the pulse of all the coffee drinking tennis players everywhere.

Is that clearer :tired:

5.7k · February 8, 2005

OK so the high school tennis team is drinking coffee and decide to write rules of conduct for all the coffee drinking tennis players in the world, Professional and amateur. I'm still not sure they have their finger on the pulse of all the coffee drinking tennis players everywhere.

Their pulse is definitely faster though... :rolleyes:

1.1k · February 8, 2005

As long as I don't have to recite it I DON'T care you play the way you went to and I'll play the way I want to. Beside I had this in my head LONG before you wrote it so I guess you nust have stole it from me using ESP or some alian brainwave. Guess I'll have to get my tinfoil hat out of the trunk. Really if your a conciouse person then you were probable doing this long before youwrote it down.

cheers

February 8, 2005

As long as I don't have to recite it I DON'T care you play the way you went to and I'll play the way I want to. Beside I had this in my head LONG before you wrote it so I guess you nust have stole it from me using ESP or some alian brainwave. Guess I'll have to get my tinfoil hat out of the trunk. Really if your a conciouse person then you were probable doing this long before youwrote it down.

cheers

Ditto again

Edited February 8, 2005 by geodinks

2k · February 8, 2005

IMHO most people won't read the whole creed. I just glanced at the page and it's a lot of reading.

I think it may be redundant to the guidelines you have to agree to when you are placing a cache.

The Creed:

When placing or seeking geocaches, I will:

Not endanger myself or others (more)

Observe all laws and rules of the area (more)

Respect property rights and seek permission where appropriate (more)

Avoid causing disruptions or public alarm (more)

Minimize my and others' impact on the environment (more)

Be considerate of others (more)

Protect the integrity of the game pieces (more)

I think that some of the above could be incorporated into something you have to agree to when a new user becomes a member.

1.2k · February 8, 2005

Those of us who are maintaining the Geocachers' Creed obtained a Creative Commons license for it.
...

Oh brother!

Thanks but I'm a boy boy now.

20.7k · February 8, 2005

I'm not even sure that it is legal for them to obtain the license for it since it is not their work.

Edited February 8, 2005 by sbell111

1.4k · February 8, 2005

I think the creed is a good device. It clearly illustrates what I have found to be common values among all geocachers. That's the purpose.

This kind of thing has to start somehow somewhere. The authoring is done, if it becomes widely accepted (as the Gx logo has) then who cares how it was created?

Limiting its use with a license will limit adoption widely.

1k · February 9, 2005

Thanks for the feedback so far - I'd like to hear from others who have an opinon on licensing the Geocachers' Creed.

In the meantime, please allow me to clarify a few things:

1) Those of us maintaining the Creed don't see ourselves as the "owners" of the Creed - rather, we're the volunteer "keepers" (for lack of a better term), on behalf of the geocachers who contributed to its development and those who support it. If others who support the philosophy of the Creed are interested in signing on, please let me know - we'd welcome the help. Eventually, I'd like to rotate out of this role - I have no need to "possess" the Creed, but I do believe there need to be "keepers" to sustain it.

2) Creating a master copy of the Creed and obtaining a CC license were suggested in PM's from geocachers who contributed to it's creation. The rationale made sense - to protect the independence and integrity of the Creed. If we didn't copyright it, someone else could and could then do with it what they wished.

The goal of licensing the Creed is not to restrict its appropriate use or distribution - the Creed is meaningless if people aren't aware of it. We've been writing to various geocaching related sites and encouraging them to link to it or reproduce it on their site, with mostly positive responses.

3) Those of us maintaining the Creed did not license it so we could make money on it. It has cost us a little money (e.g. domain name registration) and a lot of time. We put the time and money in voluntarily. We'd welcome additional volunteers to share the load, if you're interested.

We also don't object to others making money distributing the Creed, and would like to see the Creed distributed on business cards, coffee mugs, key chains, t-shirts, etc. The more people who see it, the more effective it will be.

At the time the Creed was licensed, we feared that it could be commercialized in a way that damages the reputation of geocaching or the Creed itself, which is the ONLY reason we put in the non-commercialization clause. If you want to put the Creed on a coffee mug and sell it, just send an email to the address at the bottom of the Creed page and you'll promptly get permission to do just that. If the consensus of opinion is that we're being paranoid about potential misuse, we'll drop the non-commercialization clause from the license.

I brought this issue to the gc.com forums because I thought Scout made some legitimate points and I still thought there were legitimate points in favor of licensing the Creed. I'm interested in what people have to say: The license can easily be modified (or eliminated) if that's what most people feel is best for the Creed.

Thanks for offering your guidance.

20.7k · February 9, 2005

Why does the creed need 'keepers'? If I needed to find it, couldn't I just do a search for the thread? Do you think that someone might wander off with it? :blink:

2.6k · February 9, 2005

It has its own domain name? And keepers?

What the heck?

Seriously.

I can't find an emoticon for this.

February 9, 2005

I fail to see the need to copywrite a non-creative work.

It's just a collection of common sense re: caching.

Edited February 9, 2005 by Dino Hunters

20.7k · February 9, 2005

The entire creed thing was kind of a harmless idea, but I think some people have taken it WAY too seriously.

7.2k · February 9, 2005

It has it's own independent site so, well, it can be independent. It wouldn't be viewed as independent otherwise. It wouldn't be nearly as accepted if one geocaching site "owned" it.

If it's got its own site then somebody has to administer it, thus the "keepers."

20.7k · February 9, 2005

How do the people in the forums over there like it? :blink:

February 9, 2005

2) Creating a master copy of the Creed and obtaining a CC license were suggested in PM's from geocachers who contributed to it's creation. The rationale made sense - to protect the independence and integrity of the Creed. If we didn't copyright it, someone else could and could then do with it what they wished.

You can't copyright something taken from someone else regardless of whether they have a copyright or not, so this creed is safe from that. As far as someone using it 'as they wish', my question would be how could someone use it in a way that would be inappropriate?

At the time the Creed was licensed, we feared that it could be commercialized in a way that damages the reputation of geocaching or the Creed itself, which is the ONLY reason we put in the non-commercialization clause. If you want to put the Creed on a coffee mug and sell it, just send an email to the address at the bottom of the Creed page and you'll promptly get permission to do just that. If the consensus of opinion is that we're being paranoid about potential misuse, we'll drop the non-commercialization clause from the license.

Could you offer a hypothetical example of commercial use that you think would be innappropriate?

I brought this issue to the gc.com forums because I thought Scout made some legitimate points and I still thought there were legitimate points in favor of licensing the Creed. I'm interested in what people have to say: The license can easily be modified (or eliminated) if that's what most people feel is best for the Creed.

I don't know whether you should or shouldn't license the creed, but seeing examples of what would constitute misuse would help in determining it's necessity.

2.4k · February 9, 2005

This whole thing is yet another case of people having way too much time on their hands. And I've wasted way too much time just reading this soap opera. If I never, ever hear anything at all about a creed again, it will still be too soon.

February 9, 2005

If you agree with the Code of Ethics, print up the main points, laminate the result and place it in a cache. Every finder then knows you agree.

End of story.

February 9, 2005

The entire creed thing was kind of a harmless idea, but I think some people have taken it WAY too seriously.

Yep.

February 9, 2005

2) Creating a master copy of the Creed and obtaining a CC license were suggested in PM's from geocachers who contributed to it's creation. The rationale made sense - to protect the independence and integrity of the Creed. If we didn't copyright it, someone else could and could then do with it what they wished.

You can't copyright something taken from someone else regardless of whether they have a copyright or not, so this creed is safe from that. As far as someone using it 'as they wish', my question would be how could someone use it in a way that would be inappropriate?

Geez has anybody told that to Walt Disney World?

Pretty sure Snow White, Cinderella, Pinochio, et al were around a couple hundred years before the mouse got a hold of it.

1.4k · February 9, 2005

How do you like my avatar ?

I know, there is a forum for that.

Geocaching is going to undergo more changes and the direction this activity goes is going to come from somewhere, right now that direction comes from this community and this website. Take that word, activity, it is that isn't it ? For some it is a fierce competition, for others recreation, for all an adventure of some sort. The novelty of what we are doing is very real. Right now I tell every new person who asks about geocaching that the directions and caches can be found at geocaching.com, I may be giving them bad directions but if I thought that then I wouldn't tell them to come here and read about it. The creed is good because it gives new geocachers an introduction to proper conduct when beginning this activity. The creed is good because it does not restrict your choice about where you want to go with geocaching. The creed is good because it does not have any headstart, it isn't breaking new ground it is cleaning up old cracks in the infrastructure of this activity. The changing nature of geocaching is evident when you look at what we can't do anymore, not what we can still do. Restrictions on geocaching will increase if geocachers continue to pursue any course of action they deem fit as individuals. Groundspeak helps define geocaching with listing requirements but the creed isn't a requirement, it is really just intelligent instruction. The creed has been hammered out here, not in some other place, it represents a defense against some individualistic and intelligent attackers.

The creed is good because it is a product of both the detractors and the contributors, it is as much about what it doesn't say as what it does say. As it stands, even giving it away is a tough sale and restricting it in any way will interfere with the creed's chance to become widely adopted and recognized by geocachers everywhere, which was the point of creating the creed wasn't it ?

The intent should be distribution, geocaching needs the creed, geocaching.com needs the creed even if they don't know it, new geocachers need the creed, this activity we all enjoy needs somewhere to stand, a face to present to the world at large, that's the creed, isn't it ?

$0.02CDN

February 9, 2005

Wot he said.

Quite right! :blink:

2k · February 9, 2005

If you agree with the Code of Ethics, print up the main points, laminate the result and place it in a cache. Every finder then knows you agree.

End of story.

This seems to be the best idea I've seen. I don't think the majority of people will read the whole creed.

With the laminated card then you could put a link to your website in case someone wants to read the whole creed.

Of course then you have the matter of printing and laminating the cards and getting them to people who may want them.

Edited February 9, 2005 by Eric K

20.7k · February 9, 2005

Geez has anybody told that to Walt Disney World?

Pretty sure Snow White, Cinderella, Pinochio, et al were around a couple hundred years before the mouse got a hold of it.

Disney does not hold the copyright to the Snow White, et al, stories. They hold it to their original works based on the old tales.

20.7k · February 9, 2005

<You posted lots of other stuff here.>

The intent should be distribution, geocaching needs the creed, geocaching.com needs the creed even if they don't know it, new geocachers need the creed, this activity we all enjoy needs somewhere to stand, a face to present to the world at large, that's the creed, isn't it ?

Ummm, no. Believe it or not, but we have been telling the world about this hobby for years. We have done well without the 'creed'. :mad:

BTW, I love it when people defend what they do by saying that they know what's right and that we would understand if we were as smart as they are. :mad:

Did you forget to add tons of smilies to your post?? :mad:

1.1k · February 9, 2005

The intent should be distribution, geocaching needs the creed, geocaching.com needs the creed even if they don't know it, new geocachers need the creed, this activity we all enjoy needs somewhere to stand, a face to present to the world at large, that's the creed, isn't it ?

So who is the POPE???????

If geocaching is needs a face?????

I guess xome people need to be led to the well that is there for all freely to drink from.

1.4k · February 9, 2005

I included the creed in some materials we distributed at a conference this weekend. It was very well received by park managers. This is probably the best use of it I can think of. And the fact that it's not a local invention and is actually in use elsewhere is great and provides consistency.

If you don't feel the creed is valuable - fine. But that's not the topic of this thread. It exists. It will continue to be adopted. Choose to or not.

I'd like to see more on topic discussion about the license for the creed instead of more off topic discussion of its value.

9.4k · February 9, 2005

Would you explain why it may be too restrictive to use on the geocaching.com website (edit: i.e. which clause is too restrictive)?

Who is the copyright owner?

2.6k · February 9, 2005

If you don't feel the creed is valuable - fine. But that's not the topic of this thread. It exists. It will continue to be adopted. Choose to or not.

We're here, we're queer, get used to it? Ummmm...no. Every thread on the creed I've read, sooner or later, someone is bound to chase off the naysayers because "it's not about whether or not there should be a creed." Well, okay. But if a significant number of people don't buy in, or just think it's getting a little big for its britches, whose creed is it? And how does it differ from "this is some stuff some guys have to say about geocaching"?

7.2k · February 9, 2005

But if a significant number of people don't buy in...

What is a "significant number?"

The Creed is merely a distillation of what has be already hammered out here in the forums and a bit of common sense. How is it any different that what is already accepted before it existed? The goal is to get newcomers up to speed quicker without having to read a couple of million words scattered all over multiple sites.

Not accepting the creed is just about the same as not accepting what is accepted advise and practice if you ask here on the forums.

20.7k · February 9, 2005

...Not accepting the creed is just about the same as not accepting what is accepted advise and practice if you ask here on the forums.

What if I don't accept it based on the fact that I believe that it is silly and a waste of time. I've been playing this game for a little while now and I dont believe that anyone has had to tell me this:

When placing or seeking geocaches, I will:
Not endanger myself or others

Observe all laws and rules of the area

Respect property rights and seek permission where appropriate

Avoid causing disruptions or public alarm

Minimize my and others' impact on the environment

Be considerate of others

Protect the integrity of the game pieces

The entire creed thing reminds me of the old requirement that when you picked up your boarding passes at the airport, they would ask you if you packed your own bags, had them in your possession at all times, and if anyone gave you anything to take on board.

No one ever gave the 'wrong answer', so the questions were eventually discontinued (in most cases).

Why don't we add 'I will not drown any kittens' to the creed?

Don't get me wrong. If anyone wants to use this creed to pat themselves on the back because they are so smart, or try to convince a landowner that all cachers are so responsible (when we all know that this is not necessarily the truth), go ahead.

Just today, someone used the creed in a thread to suggest that caches should not be placed in locations that someone might get injured while looking for them. That thought is silly and insulting.

1.4k · February 9, 2005

What if I don't accept it based on the fact that I believe that it is silly and a waste of time.

Then that's your personal decision and is not related to the discussion of whether the creed that *does* exist should have a creative commons license applied to it.

1.8k · February 9, 2005

It has its own domain name? And keepers?

What the heck?

Seriously.

I can't find an emoticon for this.

We're here, we're queer, get used to it? Ummmm...no. Every thread on the creed I've read, sooner or later, someone is bound to chase off the naysayers because "it's not about whether or not there should be a creed." Well, okay. But if a significant number of people don't buy in, or just think it's getting a little big for its britches, whose creed is it? And how does it differ from "this is some stuff some guys have to say about geocaching"?

Human nature, being what it is, we all like to take ourselves seriously. They are just expressing themselves. As long as they don't make us do the goose step (Oh, no, was that Godwin's Law?), it'll probably be OK. Now I have to go find that AuntieWeasel thread in the OT.

20.7k · February 9, 2005

Then that's your personal decision and is not related to the discussion of whether the creed that *does* exist should have a creative commons license applied to it.

OK. How about this. The 'keepers' of the 'creed' are not actually the authors, since it was authored by the general population on the forum. Since these individuals are not the authors, they do not have standing to hold this license.

Edited February 9, 2005 by sbell111

Licensing The Geocachers Creed

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment