I'm not sure about those sites. Should they be in sharing or commercial? They are run by companies who want to make a profit, but you do not have to pay to use them. I've left them in sharing for now, but I dunno. Thoughts?
- del.icio.us and Netscape are commercial in the sense that the companies that own them seek profits through getting users "hooked" on their services. The hooked users make the companies profit by some combination of: promoting the brand, bringing in more users (via social networks), viewing advertising, signing up for premium services, and/or producing data / content that has value.
I made a grid and things. The grid and the list are coming from the same place, so it will always be the same. To edit them click the edit section buttons, not the main edit button at the top of the page. Hope that isn't too confusing, if so revert of course. - Cohesion 20:07, 5 January 2007 (PST)
- hi, its a little bit confusing for me, because i added content here: MatrixCombined/CRW but it cannot be seen in the main article MatrixCombined. Do you know why?--Manfred 09:11, 21 January 2007 (PST)
- The reason that there is difficulty in positioning groups within commercial or sharing is that it is not in my opinion a fair sort of options. Commecre can be shared or restricted. Commerce is not a child of restriction. Restriction is the fourth box, or commerce generated through restriction. thhis would mean that people like doctorow, lawyers, teachers, and many of the social functions of information would fall into shared commerce. Groups which are proposing restriction as the only way to generate commerce are usually also advocating DRM and a preference for broadcast models of distribution. Distributed and community based information businesses and functions generate value and commerce without dependence on restriction. Information is social as well as private in its nature as well as its generation. What is a commons? What do you mean by creative commons? What do you feel is not negotiable and special about an information commons? What is the core purpose of the creative commons group? Creative Licensiing can provide options for individuals who generate information products, but if these models are new and exciting ways to generate individual restriction across the functions that information offers as a social space then these are not effecting or promoting a creative commons.
Your two fields could be shared/restricted or not for profit and commercial, but shared and commercial is a political statement and not a reality. It is a vote for a world where information is restricted in order to be commercial. =( Lucychili 11:36, 15 January 2007 (PST)