MADE WITH CREATIVE COMMONS

ii Made With Creative Commons

MADE
WITH
CREATIVE
COMMONS

PAUL STACEY AND SARAH HINCHLIFF PEARSON

Made With Creative Commons iii

Made With Creative Commons
by Paul Stacey & Sarah Hinchliff Pearson

© 2017, by Creative Commons.
Published under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license (CC BY-SA), version 4.0.

ISBN 978-87-998733-3-3

Cover and interior design by Klaus Nielsen, vinterstille.dk
Content editing by Grace Yaginuma
Illustrations by Bryan Mathers, bryanmathers.com

Downloadable e-book available at madewith.cc

Publisher:
Ctrl+Alt+Delete Books
Husumgade 10, 5.
2200 Copenhagen N
Denmark
www.cadb.dk
[email protected]

Printer:
Drukarnia POZKAL Spółka z o.o. Spółka komandytowa
88-100 Inowrocław,
ul. Cegielna 10/12,
Poland

This book is published under a CC BY-SA license, which means that you can copy, redistribute,
remix, transform, and build upon the content for any purpose, even commercially, as long as you
give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. If you
remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the
same license as the original. License details: creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

Made With Creative Commons is published with the kind support of Creative Commons and
backers of our crowdfunding-campaign on the Kickstarter.com platform.

iv Made With Creative Commons

“I don’t know a whole lot about non-
fiction journalism. . . The way that I
think about these things, and in terms
of what I can do is. . . essays like this are
occasions to watch somebody reason-
ably bright but also reasonably average
pay far closer attention and think at far
more length about all sorts of different
stuff than most of us have a chance to in
our daily lives.”

- DAVID FOSTER WALLACE

Made With Creative Commons v

vi Made With Creative Commons

CONTENTS

Foreword xi
Introduction xv

PART 1: THE BIG PICTURE

1 The New World of Digital Commons by Paul Stacey 3

The Commons, the Market, and the State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

The Four Aspects of a Resource . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

A Short History of the Commons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

The Digital Revolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

The Birth of Creative Commons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

The Changing Market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Benefits of the Digital Commons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Our Case Studies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

2 How to Be Made with Creative Commons by Sarah Hinchliff Pearson 19

Problem Zero: Getting Discovered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Making Money . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Making Human Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

3 The Creative Commons Licenses 39

PART 2: THE CASE STUDIES

Arduino . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Ártica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Blender Institute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
Cards Against Humanity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
The Conversation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Cory Doctorow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Figshare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Figure.nz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Knowledge Unlatched . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
Lumen Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Jonathan Mann . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

Made With Creative Commons vii

Noun Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Open Data Institute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
Opendesk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
OpenStax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Amanda Palmer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
PLOS (Public Library of Science) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
Rijksmuseum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
Shareable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
Siyavula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
SparkFun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
TeachAIDS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
Tribe of Noise. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
Wikimedia Foundation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151

viii Made With Creative Commons

Made With Creative Commons ix

x Made With Creative Commons

FOREWORD

Three years ago, just after I was hired as CEO of in their case study: “We don’t make jokes and
Creative Commons, I met with Cory Doctorow games to make money—we make money so
in the hotel bar of Toronto’s Gladstone Hotel. we can make more jokes and games.”
As one of CC’s most well-known proponents—
one who has also had a successful career as Creative Commons’ focus is on building a
a writer who shares his work using CC—I told vibrant, usable commons, powered by collab-
him I thought CC had a role in defining and ad- oration and gratitude. Enabling communities
vancing open business models. He kindly dis- of collaboration is at the heart of our strategy.
agreed, and called the pursuit of viable busi- With that in mind, Creative Commons began
ness models through CC “a red herring.” this book project. Led by Paul and Sarah, the
project set out to define and advance the best
He was, in a way, completely correct—those open business models. Paul and Sarah were
who make things with Creative Commons have the ideal authors to write Made with Creative
ulterior motives, as Paul Stacey explains in this Commons.
book: “Regardless of legal status, they all have
a social mission. Their primary reason for be- Paul dreams of a future where new mod-
ing is to make the world a better place, not to els of creativity and innovation overpower the
profit. Money is a means to a social end, not inequality and scarcity that today define the
the end itself.” worst parts of capitalism. He is driven by the
power of human connections between com-
In the case study about Cory Doctorow, Sar- munities of creators. He takes a longer view
ah Hinchliff Pearson cites Cory’s words from than most, and it’s made him a better educa-
his book Information Doesn’t Want to Be Free: tor, an insightful researcher, and also a skilled
“Entering the arts because you want to get rich gardener. He has a calm, cool voice that con-
is like buying lottery tickets because you want veys a passion that inspires his colleagues and
to get rich. It might work, but it almost certain- community.
ly won’t. Though, of course, someone always
wins the lottery.” Sarah is the best kind of lawyer—a true
advocate who believes in the good of people,
Today, copyright is like a lottery ticket— and the power of collective acts to change
everyone has one, and almost nobody wins. the world. Over the past year I’ve seen Sarah
What they don’t tell you is that if you choose struggle with the heartbreak that comes from
to share your work, the returns can be signif- investing so much into a political campaign
icant and long-lasting. This book is filled with that didn’t end as she’d hoped. Today, she’s
stories of those who take much greater risks more determined than ever to live with her
than the two dollars we pay for a lottery ticket, values right out on her sleeve. I can always
and instead reap the rewards that come from count on Sarah to push Creative Commons to
pursuing their passions and living their values. focus on our impact—to make the main thing
the main thing. She’s practical, detail-oriented,
So it’s not about the money. Also: it is. Find- and clever. There’s no one on my team that I
ing the means to continue to create and share enjoy debating more.
often requires some amount of income. Max
Temkin of Cards Against Humanity says it best

Made With Creative Commons xi

As coauthors, Paul and Sarah complement Jonathan Mann, who is profiled in this book,
each other perfectly. They researched, ana- writes a song a day. When I reached out to ask
lyzed, argued, and worked as a team, some- him to write a song for our Kickstarter (and to
times together and sometimes independently. offer himself up as a Kickstarter benefit), he
They dove into the research and writing with agreed immediately. Why would he agree to
passion and curiosity, and a deep respect for do that? Because the commons has collabora-
what goes into building the commons and tion at its core, and community as a key value,
sharing with the world. They remained open and because the CC licenses have helped so
to new ideas, including the possibility that many to share in the ways that they choose
their initial theories would need refinement with a global audience.
or might be completely wrong. That’s coura-
geous, and it has made for a better book that Sarah writes, “Endeavors that are Made
is insightful, honest, and useful. with Creative Commons thrive when com-
munity is built around what they do. This may
From the beginning, CC wanted to develop mean a community collaborating together to
this project with the principles and values of create something new, or it may simply be a
open collaboration. The book was funded, de- collection of like-minded people who get to
veloped, researched, and written in the open. know each other and rally around common in-
It is being shared openly under a CC BY-SA li- terests or beliefs. To a certain extent, simply
cense for anyone to use, remix, or adapt with being Made with Creative Commons auto-
attribution. It is, in itself, an example of an matically brings with it some element of com-
open business model. munity, by helping connect you to like-minded
others who recognize and are drawn to the val-
For 31 days in August of 2015, Sarah took ues symbolized by using CC.” Amanda Palmer,
point to organize and execute a Kickstarter the other musician profiled in the book, would
campaign to generate the core funding for the surely add this from her case study: “There is
book. The remainder was provided by CC’s no more satisfying end goal than having some-
generous donors and supporters. In the end, one tell you that what you do is genuinely of
it became one of the most successful book value to them.”
projects on Kickstarter, smashing through
two stretch goals and engaging over 1,600 do- This is not a typical business book. For those
nors—the majority of them new supporters of looking for a recipe or a roadmap, you might
Creative Commons. be disappointed. But for those looking to pur-
sue a social end, to build something great
Paul and Sarah worked openly throughout through collaboration, or to join a powerful
the project, publishing the plans, drafts, case and growing global community, they’re sure
studies, and analysis, early and often, and to be satisfied. Made with Creative Commons of-
they engaged communities all over the world fers a world-changing set of clearly articulated
to help write this book. As their opinions di- values and principles, some essential tools for
verged and their interests came into focus, exploring your own business opportunities,
they divided their voices and decided to keep and two dozen doses of pure inspiration.
them separate in the final product. Working in
this way requires both humility and self-confi- In a 1996 Stanford Law Review article “The
dence, and without question it has made Made Zones of Cyberspace”, CC founder Lawrence Les-
with Creative Commons a better project. sig wrote, “Cyberspace is a place. People live
there. They experience all the sorts of things
Those who work and share in the com- that they experience in real space, there. For
mons are not typical creators. They are part of
something greater than themselves, and what
they offer us all is a profound gift. What they
receive in return is gratitude and a community.

xii Made With Creative Commons

some, they experience more. They experience
this not as isolated individuals, playing some
high tech computer game; they experience it
in groups, in communities, among strangers,
among people they come to know, and some-
times like.”

I’m incredibly proud that Creative Com-
mons is able to publish this book for the many
communities that we have come to know and
like. I’m grateful to Paul and Sarah for their cre-
ativity and insights, and to the global commu-
nities that have helped us bring it to you. As CC
board member Johnathan Nightingale often
says, “It’s all made of people.”

That’s the true value of things that are Made
with Creative Commons

Ryan Merkley
CEO, Creative Commons

Made With Creative Commons xiii

xiv Made With Creative Commons

INTRODUCTION

This book shows the world how sharing can be They often didn’t like hearing what they do
good for business—but with a twist. described as an open business model. Their
endeavor was something more than that.
We began the project intending to explore Something different. Something that gener-
how creators, organizations, and businesses ates not just economic value but social and
make money to sustain what they do when cultural value. Something that involves human
they share their work using Creative Com- connection. Being Made with Creative Com-
mons licenses. Our goal was not to identify a mons is not “business as usual.”
formula for business models that use Creative
Commons but instead gather fresh ideas and We had to rethink the way we conceived of
dynamic examples that spark new, innovative this project. And it didn’t happen overnight.
models and help others follow suit by build- From the fall of 2015 through 2016, we docu-
ing on what already works. At the onset, we mented our thoughts in blog posts on Medium
framed our investigation in familiar business and with regular updates to our Kickstarter
terms. We created a blank “open business backers. We shared drafts of case studies and
model canvas,” an interactive online tool that analysis with our Kickstarter cocreators, who
would help people design and analyze their provided invaluable edits, feedback, and ad-
business model. vice. Our thinking changed dramatically over
the course of a year and a half.
Through the generous funding of Kickstart-
er backers, we set about this project first by Throughout the process, the two of us have
identifying and selecting a diverse group of often had very different ways of understand-
creators, organizations, and businesses who ing and describing what we were learning.
use Creative Commons in an integral way— Learning from each other has been one of the
what we call being Made with Creative Com- great joys of this work, and, we hope, some-
mons We interviewed them and wrote up thing that has made the final product much
their stories. We analyzed what we heard and richer than it ever could have been if either of
dug deep into the literature. us undertook this project alone. We have pre-
served our voices throughout, and you’ll be
But as we did our research, something in- able to sense our different but complementa-
teresting happened. Our initial way of framing ry approaches as you read through our differ-
the work did not match the stories we were ent sections.
hearing.
While we recommend that you read the
Those we interviewed were not typical busi- book from start to finish, each section reads
nesses selling to consumers and seeking to more or less independently. The book is struc-
maximize profits and the bottom line. Instead, tured into two main parts.
they were sharing to make the world a better
place, creating relationships and community Part one, the overview, begins with a
around the works being shared, and generat- big-picture framework written by Paul. He pro-
ing revenue not for unlimited growth but to vides some historical context for the digital
sustain the operation. commons, describing the three ways society

Made With Creative Commons xv

has managed resources and shared wealth— Made With Creative Commons
the commons, the market, and the state. He
advocates for thinking beyond business and
market terms and eloquently makes the case
for sharing and enlarging the digital commons.

The overview continues with Sarah’s chap-
ter, as she considers what it means to be suc-
cessfully Made with Creative Commons.
While making money is one piece of the pie,
there is also a set of public-minded values and
the kind of human connections that make
sharing truly meaningful. This section outlines
the ways the creators, organizations, and busi-
nesses we interviewed bring in revenue, how
they further the public interest and live out
their values, and how they foster connections
with the people with whom they share.

And to end part one, we have a short sec-
tion that explains the different Creative Com-
mons licenses. We talk about the misconcep-
tion that the more restrictive licenses—the
ones that are closest to the all-rights-reserved
model of traditional copyright—are the only
ways to make money.

Part two of the book is made up of the twen-
ty-four stories of the creators, businesses, and
organizations we interviewed. While both of us
participated in the interviews, we divided up
the writing of these profiles.

Of course, we are pleased to make the book
available using a Creative Commons Attribu-
tion-ShareAlike license. Please copy, distribute,
translate, localize, and build upon this work.

Writing this book has transformed and in-
spired us. The way we now look at and think
about what it means to be Made with Creative
Commons has irrevocably changed. We hope
this book inspires you and your enterprise to
use Creative Commons and in so doing con-
tribute to the transformation of our economy
and world for the better.

Paul and Sarah

xvi

Part 1

THE BIG PICTURE

Made With Creative Commons 1

2 Made With Creative Commons

THE NEW 1
WORLD OF
DIGITAL
COMMONS

PAUL STACEY

Jonathan Rowe eloquently describes the com- Creative Commons to share their resources
mons as “the air and oceans, the web of spe- online over the Internet.
cies, wilderness and flowing water—all are
parts of the commons. So are language and The commons is not just about shared re-
knowledge, sidewalks and public squares, sources, however. It’s also about the social
the stories of childhood and the processes of practices and values that manage them. A re-
democracy. Some parts of the commons are source is a noun, but to common—to put the
gifts of nature, others the product of human resource into the commons—is a verb.2 The
endeavor. Some are new, such as the Internet; creators, organizations, and businesses we
others are as ancient as soil and calligraphy.”1 profile are all engaged with commoning. Their
use of Creative Commons involves them in the
In Made with Creative Commons, we focus social practice of commoning, managing re-
on our current era of digital commons, a com- sources in a collective manner with a commu-
mons of human-produced works. This com- nity of users.3 Commoning is guided by a set of
mons cuts across a broad range of areas in- values and norms that balance the costs and
cluding cultural heritage, education, research, benefits of the enterprise with those of the
technology, art, design, literature, entertain- community. Special regard is given to equita-
ment, business, and data. Human-produced ble access, use, and sustainability.
works in all these areas are increasingly dig-
ital. The Internet is a kind of global, digital
commons. The individuals, organizations, and
businesses we profile in our case studies use

Made With Creative Commons 3

The Commons, the Market, and tiny or even absent. Other case studies are pri-
the State marily market-based with only a small engage-
ment with the commons. A depiction of those
Historically, there have been three ways to case studies would show the market sphere as
manage resources and share wealth: the com- large and the commons sphere as small. The
mons (managed collectively), the state (i.e., the extent to which an enterprise sees itself as be-
government), and the market—with the last ing primarily of one type or another affects the
two being the dominant forms today.4 balance of norms by which they operate.

The organizations and businesses in our All our case studies generate money as a
case studies are unique in the way they par- means of livelihood and sustainability. Money
ticipate in the commons while still engaging is primarily of the market. Finding ways to gen-
with the market and/or state. The extent of erate revenue while holding true to the core
engagement with market or state varies. Some values of the commons (usually expressed in
operate primarily as a commons with minimal mission statements) is challenging. To man-
or no reliance on the market or state.5 Others age interaction and engagement between
are very much a part of the market or state, the commons and the market requires a deft
depending on them for financial sustainabili- touch, a strong sense of values, and the ability
ty. All operate as hybrids, blending the norms to blend the best of both.
of the commons with those of the market or
state. The state has an important role to play in
fostering the use and adoption of the com-
Fig. 1. is a depiction of how an enterprise mons. State programs and funding can delib-
can have varying levels of engagement with erately contribute to and build the commons.
commons, state, and market. Beyond money, laws and regulations regard-
ing property, copyright, business, and finance
Some of our case studies are simply com- can all be designed to foster the commons.
mons and market enterprises with little or no
engagement with the state. A depiction of those
case studies would show the state sphere as

Fig. 1. Enterprise engagement with commons, state, and market. Made With Creative Commons
4

It’s helpful to understand how the commons, ment: resource characteristics, the people in-
market, and state manage resources different- volved and the process they use, the norms
ly, and not just for those who consider them- and rules they develop to govern use, and fi-
selves primarily as a commons. For businesses nally actual resource use along with outcomes
or governmental organizations who want to of that use (see Fig. 2).
engage in and use the commons, knowing how
the commons operates will help them under- Characteristics
stand how best to do so. Participating in and Resources have particular characteristics or
using the commons the same way you do the attributes that affect the way they can be used.
market or state is not a strategy for success. Some resources are natural; others are human
produced. And—significantly for today’s com-
The Four Aspects of a Resource mons—resources can be physical or digital,
which affects a resource’s inherent potential.
As part of her Nobel Prize–winning work, Eli-
nor Ostrom developed a framework for ana- Physical resources exist in limited supply. If
lyzing how natural resources are managed in a I have a physical resource and give it to you, I
commons.6 Her framework considered things no longer have it. When a resource is removed
like the biophysical characteristics of common and used, the supply becomes scarce or de-
resources, the community’s actors and the pleted. Scarcity can result in competing rivalry
interactions that take place between them, for the resource. Made with Creative Com-
rules-in-use, and outcomes. That framework mons enterprises are usually digitally based
has been simplified and generalized to apply but some of our case studies also produce
to the commons, the market, and the state for resources in physical form. The costs of pro-
this chapter. ducing and distributing a physical good usually
require them to engage with the market.
To compare and contrast the ways in which
the commons, market, and state work, let’s Physical resources are depletable, exclu-
consider four aspects of resource manage- sive, and rivalrous. Digital resources, on the
other hand, are nondepletable, nonexclusive,
ERISTICSR PARBOUDDNUIDGCAIETNADTL PRPOECOPWDWIHRHOEOCCTHAAONS AC and nonrivalrous. If I share a digital resource
OR with you, we both have the resource. Giving it
L EE S&S E SCEASUSTINHODORIRRIUETCSYTEPSHNCYAASTIRCCUAERLAOLRC HA R AOC T to you does not mean I no longer have it. Dig-
R ital resources can be infinitely stored, copied,
VE and distributed without becoming depleted,
I N FFOORRMMAALL S and at close to zero cost. Abundance rather
than scarcity is an inherent characteristic of
NORMS EMTXECTAORSAMUCERTEI digital resources.
& (L(ANWOSR)M S ) TOOCURO
RULES DSIEUTSIOVEUE EL SM The nondepletable, nonexclusive, and non-
rivalrous nature of digital resources means
G O AAD the rules and norms for managing them can
U (and ought to) be different from how physi-
cal resources are managed. However, this is
Fig. 2. Four aspects of resource management. not always the case. Digital resources are fre-
quently made artificially scarce. Placing digital
resources in the commons makes them free
and abundant.

Our case studies frequently manage hybrid
resources, which start out as digital with the
possibility of being made into a physical re-
source. The digital file of a book can be print-

Made With Creative Commons 5

ed on paper and made into a physical book. resources based on government priorities and
A computer-rendered design for furniture can procedures.
be physically manufactured in wood. This con-
version from digital to physical invariably has In the market, the people involved are pro-
costs. Often the digital resources are managed ducers, buyers, sellers, and consumers. Busi-
in a free and open way, but money is charged nesses act as intermediaries between those
to convert a digital resource into a physical one. who produce resources and those who con-
sume or use them. Market processes seek
Beyond this idea of physical versus digital, to extract as much monetary value from re-
the commons, market, and state conceive of sources as possible. In the market, resourc-
resources differently (see Fig. 3). The market es are managed as commodities, frequently
sees resources as private goods—commod- mass-produced, and sold to consumers on the
ities for sale—from which value is extracted. basis of a cash transaction.
The state sees resources as public goods that
provide value to state citizens. The commons In contrast to the state and market, resourc-
sees resources as common goods, providing es in a commons are managed more directly
a common wealth extending beyond state by the people involved.7 Creators of human
boundaries, to be passed on in undiminished produced resources can put them in the com-
or enhanced form to future generations. mons by personal choice. No permission from
state or market is required. Anyone can par-
People and processes ticipate in the commons and determine for
In the commons, the market, and the state, dif- themselves the extent to which they want to
ferent people and processes are used to man- be involved—as a contributor, user, or manag-
age resources. The processes used define both er. The people involved include not only those
who has a say and how a resource is managed. who create and use resources but those af-
fected by outcome of use. Who you are affects
In the state, a government of elected offi- your say, actions you can take, and extent of
cials is responsible for managing resources decision making. In the commons, the com-
on behalf of the public. The citizens who pro- munity as a whole manages the resources. Re-
duce and use those resources are not directly sources put into the commons using Creative
involved; instead, that responsibility is given Commons require users to give the original
over to the government. State ministries and creator credit. Knowing the person behind
departments staffed with public servants set a resource makes the commons less anony-
budgets, implement programs, and manage mous and more personal.

RIVATE ASSE MON RESOU UBLIC ASSE
T

RCE

T
P

COM

P

Fig. 3. How the market, commons, and state conceive of resources. Made With Creative Commons
6

Norms and rules applies its resources toward these aims. State
The social interactions between people, and goals are reflected in quality of life measures.
the processes used by the state, market, and
commons, evolve social norms and rules. In the commons, the goal is maximizing ac-
These norms and rules define permissions, al- cess, equity, distribution, participation, inno-
locate entitlements, and resolve disputes. vation, and sustainability. You can measure
success by looking at how many people access
State authority is governed by national con- and use a resource; how users are distributed
stitutions. Norms related to priorities and de- across gender, income, and location; if a com-
cision making are defined by elected officials munity to extend and enhance the resources
and parliamentary procedures. State rules are is being formed; and if the resources are being
expressed through policies, regulations, and used in innovative ways for personal and so-
laws. The state influences the norms and rules cial good.
of the market and commons through the rules
it passes. As hybrid combinations of the commons
with the market or state, the success and sus-
Market norms are influenced by economics tainability of all our case study enterprises
and competition for scarce resources. Market depends on their ability to strategically utilize
rules follow property, business, and financial and balance these different aspects of manag-
laws defined by the state. ing resources.

As with the market, a commons can be influ- A Short History of the Commons
enced by state policies, regulations, and laws.
But the norms and rules of a commons are Using the commons to manage resources is
largely defined by the community. They weigh part of a long historical continuum. However,
individual costs and benefits against the costs in contemporary society, the market and the
and benefits to the whole community. Consid- state dominate the discourse on how resourc-
eration is given not just to economic efficiency es are best managed. Rarely is the commons
but also to equity and sustainability.9 even considered as an option. The commons
has largely disappeared from consciousness
Goals and consideration. There are no news reports
The combination of the aspects we’ve dis- or speeches about the commons.
cussed so far—the resource’s inherent char-
acteristics, people and processes, and norms But the more than 1.1 billion resources li-
and rules—shape how resources are used. censed with Creative Commons around the
Use is also influenced by the different goals world are indications of a grassroots move
the state, market, and commons have. toward the commons. The commons is mak-
ing a resurgence. To understand the resilience
In the market, the focus is on maximizing of the commons and its current renewal, it’s
the utility of a resource. What we pay for the helpful to know something of its history.
goods we consume is seen as an objective mea-
sure of the utility they provide. The goal then For centuries, indigenous people and pre-
becomes maximizing total monetary value in industrialized societies managed resources,
the economy.10 Units consumed translates to including water, food, firewood, irrigation, fish,
sales, revenue, profit, and growth, and these wild game, and many other things collective-
are all ways to measure goals of the market. ly as a commons.11 There was no market, no
global economy. The state in the form of rul-
The state aims to use and manage resourc- ers influenced the commons but by no means
es in a way that balances the economy with controlled it. Direct social participation in a
the social and cultural needs of its citizens. commons was the primary way in which re-
Health care, education, jobs, the environment, sources were managed and needs met. (Fig. 4
transportation, security, heritage, and justice illustrates the commons in relation to the state
are all facets of a healthy society, and the state and the market.)

Made With Creative Commons 7

LONG AGO:

Fig. 4. In preindustrialized society. migrated to cities. With the emergence of the in-
dustrial revolution, land and resources became
This is followed by a long history of the state commodities sold to businesses to support
(a monarchy or ruler) taking over the commons production. Monarchies evolved into elected
for their own purposes. This is called enclosure parliaments. Commoners became labourers
of the commons.12 In olden days, “commoners” earning money operating the machinery of in-
were evicted from the land, fences and hedg- dustry. Financial, business, and property laws
es erected, laws passed, and security set up to were revised by governments to support mar-
forbid access.13 Gradually, resources became kets, growth, and productivity. Over time ready
the property of the state and the state be- access to market produced goods resulted in a
came the primary means by which resources rising standard of living, improved health, and
were managed. (See Fig. 5). education. Fig. 6 shows how today the market

Holdings of land, water, and game were
distributed to ruling family and political ap-
pointees. Commoners displaced from the land

STATE TAKEOVER OF THE COMMONS:

Fig. 5. The commons is gradually superseded by the state. Made With Creative Commons
8

is the primary means by which resources are directly involved. With natural resources, there
managed. is a regional locality. The people in the region
are the most familiar with the natural resource,
However, the world today is going through have the most direct relationship and history
turbulent times. The benefits of the market with it, and are therefore best situated to man-
have been offset by unequal distribution and age it. Ostrom’s approach to the governance of
overexploitation. natural resources broke with convention; she
recognized the importance of the commons as
Overexploitation was the topic of Garrett an alternative to the market or state for solving
Hardin’s influential essay “The Tragedy of the problems of collective action.14
Commons,” published in Science in 1968. Har-
din argues that everyone in a commons seeks Hardin failed to consider the actual social
to maximize personal gain and will continue to dynamic of the commons. His model assumed
do so even when the limits of the commons that people in the commons act autonomous-
are reached. The commons is then tragically ly, out of pure self-interest, without interac-
depleted to the point where it can no longer tion or consideration of others. But as Ostrom
support anyone. Hardin’s essay became widely found, in reality, managing common resources
accepted as an economic truism and a justifi- together forms a community and encourages
cation for private property and free markets. discourse. This naturally generates norms and
rules that help people work collectively and
However, there is one serious flaw with Har- ensure a sustainable commons. Paradoxically,
din’s “The Tragedy of the Commons”—it’s fic- while Hardin’s essay is called The Tragedy of
tion. Hardin did not actually study how real com- the Commons it might more accurately be ti-
mons work. Elinor Ostrom won the 2009 Nobel tled The Tragedy of the Market.
Prize in economics for her work studying differ-
ent commons all around the world. Ostrom’s Hardin’s story is based on the premise of de-
work shows that natural resource commons pletable resources. Economists have focused
can be successfully managed by local com- almost exclusively on scarcity-based markets.
munities without any regulation by central au- Very little is known about how abundance
thorities or without privatization. Government works.15 The emergence of information tech-
and privatization are not the only two choices. nology and the Internet has led to an explosion
There is a third way: management by the peo- in digital resources and new means of sharing
ple, where those that are directly impacted are

TODAY:

Fig. 6. How the market, the state, and the commons look today. 9
Made With Creative Commons

and distribution. Digital resources can never open-source software also generated a net-
be depleted. An absence of a theory or mod- work effect where the value of a product or
el for how abundance works, however, has led service increases with the number of people
the market to make digital resources artificially using it.17 The dramatic growth of the Internet
scarce and makes it possible for the usual mar- itself owes much to the fact that nobody has
ket norms and rules to be applied. a proprietary lock on core Internet protocols.

When it comes to use of state funds to cre- While open-source software functions as a
ate digital goods, however, there is really no commons, many businesses and markets did
justification for artificial scarcity. The norm for build up around it. Business models based
state funded digital works should be that they on the licenses and standards of open-source
are freely and openly available to the public software evolved alongside organizations that
that paid for them. managed software code on principles of abun-
dance rather than scarcity. Eric Raymond’s es-
The Digital Revolution say “The Magic Cauldron” does a great job of
analyzing the economics and business models
In the early days of computing, programmers associated with open-source software.18 These
and developers learned from each other by models can provide examples of sustainable
sharing software. In the 1980s, the free-soft- approaches for those Made with Creative
ware movement codified this practice of shar- Commons.
ing into a set of principles and freedoms:
It isn’t just about an abundant availability
• The freedom to run a software program as of digital assets but also about abundance of
you wish, for any purpose. participation. The growth of personal comput-
ing, information technology, and the Internet
• The freedom to study how a software pro- made it possible for mass participation in pro-
gram works (because access to the source ducing creative works and distributing them.
code has been freely given), and change it Photos, books, music, and many other forms
so it does your computing as you wish. of digital content could now be readily creat-
ed and distributed by almost anyone. Despite
• The freedom to redistribute copies. this potential for abundance, by default these
digital works are governed by copyright laws.
• The freedom to distribute copies of your Under copyright, a digital work is the property
modified versions to others.16 of the creator, and by law others are excluded
from accessing and using it without the cre-
These principles and freedoms constitute a set ator’s permission.
of norms and rules that typify a digital com-
mons. But people like to share. One of the ways we
define ourselves is by sharing valuable and en-
In the late 1990s, to make the sharing of tertaining content. Doing so grows and nour-
source code and collaboration more appeal- ishes relationships, seeks to change opinions,
ing to companies, the open-source-software encourages action, and informs others about
initiative converted these principles into li- who we are and what we care about. Sharing
censes and standards for managing access lets us feel more involved with the world.19
to and distribution of software. The benefits
of open source—such as reliability, scalabil- The Birth of Creative Commons
ity, and quality verified by independent peer
review—became widely recognized and ac- In 2001, Creative Commons was created as a
cepted. Customers liked the way open source nonprofit to support all those who wanted to
gave them control without being locked into share digital content. A suite of Creative Com-
a closed, proprietary technology. Free and mons licenses was modeled on those of open-
source software but for use with digital con-

10 Made With Creative Commons

tent rather than software code. The licenses ipation has been spurred by the free-culture
give everyone from individual creators to large movement, a social movement that promotes
companies and institutions a simple, stan- the freedom to distribute and modify cre-
dardized way to grant copyright permissions ative works. The free-culture movement sees
to their creative work. a commons as providing significant benefits
compared to restrictive copyright laws. This
Creative Commons licenses have a three-lay- ethos of free exchange in a commons aligns
er design. The norms and rules of each license the free-culture movement with the free and
are first expressed in full legal language as open-source software movement.
used by lawyers. This layer is called the legal
code. But since most creators and users are Over time, Creative Commons has spawned
not lawyers, the licenses also have a commons a range of open movements, including open
deed, expressing the permissions in plain lan- educational resources, open access, open sci-
guage, which regular people can read and ence, and open data. The goal in every case
quickly understand. It acts as a user-friend- has been to democratize participation and
ly interface to the legal-code layer beneath. share digital resources at no cost, with legal
The third layer is the machine-readable one, permissions for anyone to freely access, use,
making it easy for the Web to know a work and modify.
is Creative Commons–licensed by expressing
permissions in a way that software systems, The state is increasingly involved in support-
search engines, and other kinds of technolo- ing open movements. The Open Government
gy can understand.20 Taken together, these Partnership was launched in 2011 to provide
three layers ensure creators, users, and even an international platform for governments to
the Web itself understand the norms and rules become more open, accountable, and respon-
associated with digital content in a commons. sive to citizens. Since then, it has grown from
eight participating countries to seventy.22 In all
In 2015, there were over one billion Cre- these countries, government and civil society
ative Commons licensed works in a global are working together to develop and imple-
commons. These works were viewed online ment ambitious open-government reforms.
136 billion times. People are using Creative Governments are increasingly adopting Cre-
Commons licenses all around the world, in ative Commons to ensure works funded with
thirty-four languages. These resources include taxpayer dollars are open and free to the pub-
photos, artwork, research articles in journals, lic that paid for them.
educational resources, music and other audio
tracks, and videos. The Changing Market

Individual artists, photographers, musi- Today’s market is largely driven by global cap-
cians, and filmmakers use Creative Commons, italism. Law and financial systems are struc-
but so do museums, governments, creative tured to support extraction, privatization, and
industries, manufacturers, and publishers. corporate growth. A perception that the mar-
Millions of websites use CC licenses, includ- ket is more efficient than the state has led to
ing major platforms like Wikipedia and Flickr continual privatization of many public natural
and smaller ones like blogs.21 Users of Creative resources, utilities, services, and infrastruc-
Commons are diverse and cut across many dif- tures.23 While this system has been highly ef-
ferent sectors. (Our case studies were chosen ficient at generating consumerism and the
to reflect that diversity.) growth of gross domestic product, the impact
on human well-being has been mixed. Offset-
Some see Creative Commons as a way ting rising living standards and improvements
to share a gift with others, a way of getting to health and education are ever-increasing
known, or a way to provide social benefit. Oth- wealth inequality, social inequality, poverty,
ers are simply committed to the norms asso-
ciated with a commons. And for some, partic-

Made With Creative Commons 11

deterioration of our natural environment, and economic rules than physical ones. In a world
breakdowns of democracy.24 where prices always seem to go up, informa-
tion technology is an anomaly. Computer-pro-
In light of these challenges there is a grow- cessing power, storage, and bandwidth are all
ing recognition that GDP growth should not be rapidly increasing, but rather than costs going
an end in itself, that development needs to be up, costs are coming down. Digital technolo-
socially and economically inclusive, that envi- gies are getting faster, better, and cheaper. The
ronmental sustainability is a requirement not cost of anything built on these technologies
an option, and that we need to better balance will always go down until it is close to zero.29
the market, state and community.25
Those that are Made with Creative Com-
These realizations have led to a resurgence mons are looking to leverage the unique
of interest in the commons as a means of en- inherent characteristics of digital resourc-
abling that balance. City governments like es, including lowering costs. The use of dig-
Bologna, Italy, are collaborating with their cit- ital-rights-management technologies in the
izens to put in place regulations for the care form of locks, passwords, and controls to
and regeneration of urban commons.26 Seoul prevent digital goods from being accessed,
and Amsterdam call themselves “sharing cit- changed, replicated, and distributed is minimal
ies,” looking to make sustainable and more or nonexistent. Instead, Creative Commons li-
efficient use of scarce resources. They see censes are used to put digital content out in
sharing as a way to improve the use of public the commons, taking advantage of the unique
spaces, mobility, social cohesion, and safety.27 economics associated with being digital. The
aim is to see digital resources used as widely
The market itself has taken an interest in and by as many people as possible. Maximiz-
the sharing economy, with businesses like ing access and participation is a common goal.
Airbnb providing a peer-to-peer marketplace They aim for abundance over scarcity.
for short-term lodging and Uber providing a
platform for ride sharing. However, Airbnb and The incremental cost of storing, copying,
Uber are still largely operating under the usual and distributing digital goods is next to zero,
norms and rules of the market, making them making abundance possible. But imagining a
less like a commons and more like a tradition- market based on abundance rather than scar-
al business seeking financial gain. Much of the city is so alien to the way we conceive of eco-
sharing economy is not about the commons nomic theory and practice that we struggle to
or building an alternative to a corporate-driv- do so.30 Those that are Made with Creative
en market economy; it’s about extending the Commons are each pioneering in this new
deregulated free market into new areas of landscape, devising their own economic mod-
our lives.28 While none of the people we inter- els and practice.
viewed for our case studies would describe
themselves as part of the sharing economy, Some are looking to minimize their inter-
there are in fact some significant parallels. actions with the market and operate as au-
Both the sharing economy and the commons tonomously as possible. Others are operating
make better use of asset capacity. The sharing largely as a business within the existing rules
economy sees personal residents and cars as and norms of the market. And still others are
having latent spare capacity with rental value. looking to change the norms and rules by
The equitable access of the commons broad- which the market operates.
ens and diversifies the number of people who
can use and derive value from an asset. For an ordinary corporation, making social
benefit a part of its operations is difficult, as
One way Made with Creative Commons it’s legally required to make decisions that fi-
case studies differ from those of the shar- nancially benefit stockholders. But new forms
ing economy is their focus on digital resourc- of business are emerging. There are benefit
es. Digital resources function under different corporations and social enterprises, which

12 Made With Creative Commons

broaden their business goals from making a The creators, businesses, and organizations
profit to making a positive impact on society, we profile all engage with the market to gen-
workers, the community, and the environ- erate revenue in some way. The ways in which
ment.31 Community-owned businesses, work- this is done vary widely. Donations, pay what
er-owned businesses, cooperatives, guilds, you can, memberships, “digital for free but
and other organizational forms offer alterna- physical for a fee,” crowdfunding, matchmak-
tives to the traditional corporation. Collective- ing, value-add services, patrons . . . the list goes
ly, these alternative market entities are chang- on and on. (Initial description of how to earn
ing the rules and norms of the market.32 revenue available through reference note. For
latest thinking see How to Bring In Money in
“A book on open business models” is how the next section.) 36 There is no single magic
we described it in this book’s Kickstarter cam- bullet, and each endeavor has devised ways
paign. We used a handbook called Business that work for them. Most make use of more
Model Generation as our reference for defining than one way. Diversifying revenue streams
just what a business model is. Developed over lowers risk and provides multiple paths to sus-
nine years using an “open process” involving tainability.
470 coauthors from forty-five countries, it is
useful as a framework for talking about busi- Benefits of the Digital Commons
ness models.33
While it may be clear why commons-based or-
It contains a “business model canvas,” which ganizations want to interact and engage with
conceives of a business model as having nine the market (they need money to survive), it
building blocks.34 This blank canvas can serve may be less obvious why the market would en-
as a tool for anyone to design their own busi- gage with the commons. The digital commons
ness model. We remixed this business model offers many benefits.
canvas into an open business model canvas,
adding three more building blocks relevant The commons speeds dissemination. The free
to hybrid market, commons enterprises: so- flow of resources in the commons offers tre-
cial good, Creative Commons license, and “type mendous economies of scale. Distribution is
of open environment that the business fits in.”35 decentralized, with all those in the commons
This enhanced canvas proved useful when empowered to share the resources they have
we analyzed businesses and helped start-ups access to. Those that are Made with Creative
plan their economic model. Commons have a reduced need for sales or
marketing. Decentralized distribution ampli-
In our case study interviews, many ex- fies supply and know-how.
pressed discomfort over describing them-
selves as an open business model—the term The commons ensures access to all. The mar-
business model suggested primarily being ket has traditionally operated by putting re-
situated in the market. Where you sit on the sources behind a paywall requiring payment
commons-to-market spectrum affects the ex- first before access. The commons puts re-
tent to which you see yourself as a business in sources in the open, providing access up front
the market. The more central to the mission without payment. Those that are Made with
shared resources and commons values are, Creative Commons make little or no use of
the less comfort there is in describing your- digital rights management (DRM) to manage
self, or depicting what you do, as a business. resources. Not using DRM frees them of the
Not all who have endeavors Made with Cre- costs of acquiring DRM technology and staff
ative Commons use business speak; for some resources to engage in the punitive practices
the process has been experimental, emergent, associated with restricting access. The way the
and organic rather than carefully planned us- commons provides access to everyone levels
ing a predefined model. the playing field and promotes inclusiveness,
equity, and fairness.

Made With Creative Commons 13

The commons maximizes participation. Re- itized resources persist without becoming
sources in the commons can be used and con- depleted, and through use are improved, per-
tributed to by everyone. Using the resources sonalized, and localized. Each use adds value.
of others, contributing your own, and mixing The market focuses on generating value for
yours with others to create new works are all the business and the customer. The commons
dynamic forms of participation made possible generates value for a broader range of bene-
by the commons. Being Made with Creative ficiaries including the business, the custom-
Commons means you’re engaging as many us- er, the creator, the public, and the commons
ers with your resources as possible. Users are itself. The generative nature of the commons
also authoring, editing, remixing, curating, lo- means that it is more cost-effective and pro-
calizing, translating, and distributing. The com- duces a greater return on investment. Value is
mons makes it possible for people to directly not just measured in financial terms. Each new
participate in culture, knowledge building, and resource added to the commons provides val-
even democracy, and many other socially ben- ue to the public and contributes to the overall
eficial practices. value of the commons.

The commons spurs innovation. Resources in The commons brings people together for a
the hands of more people who can use them common cause. The commons vests people
leads to new ideas. The way commons resourc- directly with the responsibility to manage the
es can be modified, customized, and improved resources for the common good. The costs
results in derivative works never imagined by and benefits for the individual are balanced
the original creator. Some endeavors that are with the costs and benefits for the communi-
Made with Creative Commons deliberately ty and for future generations. Resources are
encourage users to take the resources being not anonymous or mass produced. Their prov-
shared and innovate them. Doing so moves enance is known and acknowledged through
research and development (R&D) from being attribution and other means. Those that are
solely inside the organization to being in the Made with Creative Commons generate
community.37 Community-based innovation awareness and reputation based on their con-
will keep an organization or business on its tributions to the commons. The reach, impact,
toes. It must continue to contribute new ideas, and sustainability of those contributions rest
absorb and build on top of the innovations of largely on their ability to forge relationships
others, and steward the resources and the re- and connections with those who use and im-
lationship with the community. prove them. By functioning on the basis of so-
cial engagement, not monetary exchange, the
The commons boosts reach and impact. The commons unifies people.
digital commons is global. Resources may be
created for a local or regional need, but they go The benefits of the commons are many.
far and wide generating a global impact. In the When these benefits align with the goals of
digital world, there are no borders between individuals, communities, businesses in the
countries. When you are Made with Creative market, or state enterprises, choosing to man-
Commons, you are often local and global at age resources as a commons ought to be the
the same time: Digital designs being globally option of choice.
distributed but made and manufactured lo-
cally. Digital books or music being globally dis- Our Case Studies
tributed but readings and concerts performed
locally. The digital commons magnifies impact The creators, organizations, and business-
by connecting creators to those who use and es in our case studies operate as nonprofits,
build on their work both locally and globally. for-profits, and social enterprises. Regardless
of legal status, they all have a social mission.
The commons is generative. Instead of ex- Their primary reason for being is to make the
tracting value, the commons adds value. Dig- world a better place, not to profit. Money is a

14 Made With Creative Commons

means to a social end, not the end itself. They Give more than you take. Be open and inclu-
factor public interest into decisions, behavior, sive. Add value. Make visible what you are us-
and practices. Transparency and trust are re- ing from the commons, what you are adding,
ally important. Impact and success are mea- and what you are monetizing. Maximize abun-
sured against social aims expressed in mission dance. Give attribution. Express gratitude. De-
statements, and are not just about the finan- velop trust; don’t exploit. Build relationship
cial bottom line. and community. Be transparent. Defend the
commons.
The case studies are based on the narra-
tives told to us by founders and key staff. In- The new digital commons is here to stay.
stead of solely using financials as the measure Made With Creative Commons case studies
of success and sustainability, they emphasized show how it’s possible to be part of this com-
their mission, practices, and means by which mons while still functioning within market and
they measure success. Metrics of success are state systems. The commons generates ben-
a blend of how social goals are being met and efits neither the market nor state can achieve
how sustainable the enterprise is. on their own. Rather than the market or state
dominating as primary means of resource
Our case studies are diverse, ranging from management, a more balanced alternative is
publishing to education and manufacturing. All possible.
of the organizations, businesses, and creators
in the case studies produce digital resources. Enterprise use of Creative Commons has
Those resources exist in many forms including only just begun. The case studies in this book
books, designs, songs, research, data, cultur- are merely starting points. Each is changing
al works, education materials, graphic icons, and evolving over time. Many more are join-
and video. Some are digital representations of ing and inventing new models. This overview
physical resources. Others are born digital but aims to provide a framework and language
can be made into physical resources. for thinking and talking about the new digital
commons. The remaining sections go deeper
They are creating new resources, or using providing further guidance and insights on
the resources of others, or mixing existing how it works.
resources together to make something new.
They, and their audience, all play a direct, par-
ticipatory role in managing those resources,
including their preservation, curation, distri-
bution, and enhancement. Access and partic-
ipation is open to all regardless of monetary
means.

And as users of Creative Commons licenses,
they are automatically part of a global commu-
nity. The new digital commons is global. Those
we profiled come from nearly every continent
in the world. To build and interact within this
global community is conducive to success.

Creative Commons licenses may express le-
gal rules around the use of resources in a com-
mons, but success in the commons requires
more than following the letter of the law and
acquiring financial means. Over and over we
heard in our interviews how success and sus-
tainability are tied to a set of beliefs, values,
and principles that underlie their actions:

Made With Creative Commons 15

Notes 12 Bollier, Think Like a Commoner, 55–78.

1 Jonathan Rowe, Our Common Wealth (San 13 Fritjof Capra and Ugo Mattei, The Ecolo-
Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2013), 14. gy of Law: Toward a Legal System in Tune
with Nature and Community (Oakland, CA:
2 David Bollier, Think Like a Commoner: A Berrett-Koehler, 2015), 46–57; and Bollier,
Short Introduction to the Life of the Com- Think Like a Commoner, 88.
mons (Gabriola Island, BC: New Society,
2014), 176. 14 Brett M. Frischmann, Michael J. Madison,
and Katherine J. Strandburg, “Governing
3 Ibid., 15. Knowledge Commons,” in Frischmann,
Madison, and Strandburg Governing
4 Ibid., 145. Knowledge Commons, 12.

5 Ibid., 175. 15 Farley and Kubiszewski, “Economics of
Information,” in Elliott and Hepting, Free
6 Daniel H. Cole, “Learning from Lin: Les- Knowledge, 203.
sons and Cautions from the Natural
Commons for the Knowledge Commons,” 16 “What Is Free Software?” GNU Operating
in Governing Knowledge Commons, eds. System, the Free Software Foundation’s
Brett M. Frischmann, Michael J. Madison, Licensing and Compliance Lab, accessed
and Katherine J. Strandburg (New York: December 30, 2016, www.gnu.org
Oxford University Press, 2014), 53. /philosophy/free-sw.

7 Max Haiven, Crises of Imagination, Crises 17 Wikipedia, s.v. “Open-source software,”
of Power: Capitalism, Creativity and the last modified November 22, 2016.
Commons (New York: Zed Books, 2014),
93. 18 Eric S. Raymond, “The Magic Cauldron,”
in The Cathedral and the Bazaar: Musings
8 Cole, “Learning from Lin,” in Frischmann, on Linux and Open Source by an Accidental
Madison, and Strandburg, Governing Revolutionary, rev. ed. (Sebastopol, CA:
Knowledge Commons, 59. O’Reilly Media, 2001), www.catb.org/esr
/writings/cathedral-bazaar/.
9 Bollier, Think Like a Commoner, 175.
19 New York Times Customer Insight Group,
10 Joshua Farley and Ida Kubiszewski, “The The Psychology of Sharing: Why Do People
Economics of Information in a Post-Car- Share Online? (New York: New York Times
bon Economy,” in Free Knowledge: Con- Customer Insight Group, 2011), www.iab
fronting the Commodification of Human .net/media/file/POSWhitePaper.pdf.
Discovery, eds. Patricia W. Elliott and Daryl
H. Hepting (Regina, SK: University of Regi- 20 “Licensing Considerations,” Creative
na Press, 2015), 201–4. Commons, accessed December 30, 2016,
creativecommons.org/share-your-work
11 Rowe, Our Common Wealth, 19; and /licensing-considerations/.
Heather Menzies, Reclaiming the Com-
mons for the Common Good: A Memoir 21 Creative Commons, 2015 State of the Commons
and Manifesto (Gabriola Island, BC: New (Mountain View, CA: Creative Commons,
Society, 2014), 42–43. 2015), stateof.creativecommons.org/2015/.

16 Made With Creative Commons

22 Wikipedia, s.v. “Open Government Part- Straight Talk about the Next American Rev-
nership,” last modified September 24, olution: Democratizing Wealth and Building
2016, en.wikipedia.org/wiki a Community-Sustaining Economy from
/Open_Government_Partnership. the Ground Up (White River Junction, VT:
Chelsea Green, 2013), 39.
23 Capra and Mattei, Ecology of Law, 114.
32 Marjorie Kelly, Owning Our Future: The
24 Ibid., 116. Emerging Ownership Revolution; Journeys
to a Generative Economy (San Francisco:
25 The Swedish International Development Berrett-Koehler, 2012), 8–9.
Cooperation Agency, “Stockholm State-
ment” accessed February 15, 2017, sida. 33 Alex Osterwalder and Yves Pigneur, Busi-
se/globalassets/sida/eng/press ness Model Generation (Hoboken, NJ: John
/stockholm-statement.pdf Wiley and Sons, 2010). A preview of the
book is available at strategyzer.com
26 City of Bologna, Regulation on Collabora- /books/business-model-generation.
tion between Citizens and the City for the
Care and Regeneration of Urban Commons, 34 This business model canvas is available to
trans. LabGov (LABoratory for the GOVer- download at strategyzer.com/canvas
nance of Commons) (Bologna, Italy: City /business-model-canvas.
of Bologna, 2014), www.labgov.it
/wp-content/uploads/sites/9 35 We’ve made the “Open Business Model
/Bologna-Regulation-on-collaboration Canvas,” designed by the coauthor Paul
-between-citizens-and-the-city-for Stacey, available online at docs.google
-the-cure-and-regeneration-of .com/drawings/d
-urban-commons1.pdf. /1QOIDa2qak7wZSSOa4Wv6qVMO77Iwk-
KHN7CYyq0wHivs/edit. You can also find
27 The Seoul Sharing City website is english. the accompanying Open Business Model
sharehub.kr; for Amsterdam Sharing City, Canvas Questions at docs.google.com
go to www.sharenl.nl/amsterdam /drawings/d/1kACK7TkoJgsM18HUWC-
-sharing-city/. bX9xuQ0Byna4plSVZXZGTtays/edit.

28 Tom Slee, What’s Yours Is Mine: Against the 36 A more comprehensive list of revenue
Sharing Economy (New York: OR Books, streams is available in this post I wrote
2015), 42. on Medium on March 6, 2016. “What Is an
Open Business Model and How Can You
39 Chris Anderson, Free: How Today’s Smart- Generate Revenue?”, available at
est Businesses Profit by Giving Something medium.com/made-with-creative
for Nothing, Reprint with new preface. -commons/what-is-an-open-business
(New York: Hyperion, 2010), 78. -model-and-how-can-you-generate
-revenue-5854d2659b15.
30 Jeremy Rifkin, The Zero Marginal Cost Soci-
ety: The Internet of Things, the Collaborative 37 Henry Chesbrough, Open Innovation: The
Commons, and the Eclipse of Capitalism New Imperative for Creating and Profiting
(New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014), from Technology (Boston: Harvard Busi-
273. ness Review Press, 2006), 31–44.

31 Gar Alperovitz, What Then Must We Do?

Made With Creative Commons 17

18 Made With Creative Commons

HOW 2
TO BE
MADE WITH
CREATIVE
COMMONS

SARAH HINCHLIFF PEARSON

When we began this project in August 2015, we use the licenses, these endeavors share their
set out to write a book about business mod- work—whether it’s open data or furniture de-
els that involve Creative Commons licenses signs—in a way that enables the public not
in some significant way—what we call being only to access it but also to make use of it.
Made with Creative Commons. With the help
of our Kickstarter backers, we chose twen- We analyzed the revenue models, custom-
ty-four endeavors from all around the world er segments, and value propositions of each
that are Made with Creative Commons. The endeavor. We searched for ways that putting
mix is diverse, from an individual musician to a their content under Creative Commons licens-
university-textbook publisher to an electronics es helped boost sales or increase reach. Using
manufacturer. Some make their own content traditional measures of economic success, we
and share under Creative Commons licensing. tried to map these business models in a way
Others are platforms for CC-licensed creative that meaningfully incorporated the impact of
work made by others. Many sit somewhere in Creative Commons. In our interviews, we dug
between, both using and contributing creative into the motivations, the role of CC licenses,
work that’s shared with the public. Like all who modes of revenue generation, definitions of
success.

Made With Creative Commons 19

In fairly short order, we realized the book the creators, organizations, and businesses we
we set out to write was quite different from profiled, there was one constant. Being Made
the one that was revealing itself in our inter- with Creative Commons may be good for
views and research. business, but that is not why they do it. Shar-
ing work with Creative Commons is, at its core,
It isn’t that we were wrong to think you a moral decision. The commercial and other
can make money while using Creative Com- self-interested benefits are secondary. Most
mons licenses. In many instances, CC can help decided to use CC licenses first and found a
make you more money. Nor were we wrong revenue model later. This was our first hint
that there are business models out there that that writing a book solely about the impact of
others who want to use CC licensing as part sharing on business might be a little off track.
of their livelihood or business could replicate.
What we didn’t realize was just how misguided But we also started to realize something
it would be to write a book about being Made about what it means to be Made with Cre-
with Creative Commons using only a busi- ative Commons. When people talked to us
ness lens. about how and why they used CC, it was clear
that it meant something more than using a
According to the seminal handbook Business copyright license. It also represented a set of
Model Generation, a business model “describes values. There is symbolism behind using CC,
the rationale of how an organization creates, and that symbolism has many layers.
delivers, and captures value.”1 Thinking about
sharing in terms of creating and capturing At one level, being Made with Creative
value always felt inappropriately transaction- Commons expresses an affinity for the value
al and out of place, something we heard time of Creative Commons. While there are many
and time again in our interviews. And as Cory different flavors of CC licenses and nearly in-
Doctorow told us in our interview with him, finite ways to be Made with Creative Com-
“Business model can mean anything you want mons, the basic value system is rooted in a
it to mean.” fundamental belief that knowledge and cre-
ativity are building blocks of our culture rather
Eventually, we got it. Being Made with Cre- than just commodities from which to extract
ative Commons is more than a business mod- market value. These values reflect a belief that
el. While we will talk about specific revenue the common good should always be part of
models as one piece of our analysis (and in the equation when we determine how to reg-
more detail in the case studies), we scrapped ulate our cultural outputs. They reflect a belief
that as our guiding rubric for the book. that everyone has something to contribute,
and that no one can own our shared culture.
Admittedly, it took me a long time to get They reflect a belief in the promise of sharing.
there. When Paul and I divided up our writing
after finishing the research, my charge was Whether the public makes use of the oppor-
to distill everything we learned from the case tunity to copy and adapt your work, sharing
studies and write up the practical lessons and with a Creative Commons license is a symbol
takeaways. I spent months trying to jam what of how you want to interact with the people
we learned into the business-model box, con- who consume your work. Whenever you cre-
vinced there must be some formula for the ate something, “all rights reserved” under
way things interacted. But there is no formu- copyright is automatic, so the copyright sym-
la. You’ll probably have to discard that way of bol (©) on the work does not necessarily come
thinking before you read any further. across as a marker of distrust or excessive
protectionism. But using a CC license can be a
In every interview, we started from the same symbol of the opposite—of wanting a real hu-
simple questions. Amid all the diversity among man relationship, rather than an impersonal

20 Made With Creative Commons

market transaction. It leaves open the possi- Even if profit isn’t the end goal, you have to
bility of connection. bring in money to be successfully Made with
Creative Commons. At a bare minimum, you
Being Made with Creative Commons not have to make enough money to keep the lights
only demonstrates values connected to CC on.
and sharing. It also demonstrates that some-
thing other than profit drives what you do. In The costs of doing business vary widely for
our interviews, we always asked what success those made with CC, but there is generally a
looked like for them. It was stunning how rare- much lower threshold for sustainability than
ly money was mentioned. Most have a deeper there used to be for any creative endeavor.
purpose and a different vision of success. Digital technology has made it easier than ever
to create, and easier than ever to distribute. As
The driving motivation varies depending on Doctorow put it in his book Information Doesn’t
the type of endeavor. For individual creators, Want to Be Free, “If analog dollars have turned
it is most often about personal inspiration. In into digital dimes (as the critics of ad-support-
some ways, this is nothing new. As Doctorow ed media have it), there is the fact that it’s
has written, “Creators usually start doing what possible to run a business that gets the same
they do for love.”2 But when you share your amount of advertising as its forebears at a
creative work under a CC license, that dynamic fraction of the price.”
is even more pronounced. Similarly, for tech-
nological innovators, it is often less about cre- Some creation costs are the same as they
ating a specific new thing that will make you always were. It takes the same amount of time
rich and more about solving a specific problem and money to write a peer-reviewed journal
you have. The creators of Arduino told us that article or paint a painting. Technology can’t
the key question when creating something is change that. But other costs are dramati-
“Do you as the creator want to use it? It has to cally reduced by technology, particularly in
have personal use and meaning.” production-heavy domains like filmmaking.3
CC-licensed content and content in the public
Many that are Made with Creative Com- domain, as well as the work of volunteer col-
mons have an express social mission that laborators, can also dramatically reduce costs
underpins everything they do. In many cas- if they’re being used as resources to create
es, sharing with Creative Commons expressly something new. And, of course, there is the
advances that social mission, and using the reality that some content would be created
licenses can be the difference between legiti- whether or not the creator is paid because it is
macy and hypocrisy. Noun Project co-founder a labor of love.
Edward Boatman told us they could not have
stated their social mission of sharing with a Distributing content is almost universally
straight face if they weren’t willing to show the cheaper than ever. Once content is created,
world that it was OK to share their content us- the costs to distribute copies digitally are es-
ing a Creative Commons license. sentially zero.4 The costs to distribute physi-
cal copies are still significant, but lower than
This dynamic is probably one reason why they have been historically. And it is now much
there are so many nonprofit examples of being easier to print and distribute physical copies
Made with Creative Commons. The content on-demand, which also reduces costs. De-
is the result of a labor of love or a tool to drive pending on the endeavor, there can be a whole
social change, and money is like gas in the car, host of other possible expenses like marketing
something that you need to keep going but and promotion, and even expenses associated
not an end in itself. Being Made with Creative with the various ways money is being made,
Commons is a different vision of a business or like touring or custom training.
livelihood, where profit is not paramount, and
producing social good and human connection
are integral to success.

Made With Creative Commons 21

It’s important to recognize that the biggest predictable ways. The first is how it helps solve
impact of technology on creative endeavors “problem zero.”
is that creators can now foot the costs of cre-
ation and distribution themselves. People now Problem Zero: Getting Discovered
often have a direct route to their potential pub-
lic without necessarily needing intermediaries Once you create or collect your content, the
like record labels and book publishers. Doc- next step is finding users, customers, fans—in
torow wrote, “If you’re a creator who never got other words, your people. As Amanda Palmer
the time of day from one of the great imperial wrote, “It has to start with the art. The songs
powers, this is your time. Where once you had had to touch people initially, and mean some-
no means of reaching an audience without the thing, for anything to work at all.”6 There isn’t
assistance of the industry-dominating mega- any magic to finding your people, and there is
companies, now you have hundreds of ways to certainly no formula. Your work has to connect
do it without them.”5 Previously, distribution with people and offer them some artistic and/
of creative work involved the costs associated or utilitarian value. In some ways, this is easier
with sustaining a monolithic entity, now cre- than ever. Online we are not limited by shelf
ators can do the work themselves. That means space, so there is room for every obscure in-
the financial needs of creative endeavors can terest, taste, and need imaginable. This is what
be a lot more modest. Chris Anderson dubbed the Long Tail, where
consumption becomes less about mainstream
Whether for an individual creator or a larg- mass “hits” and more about micromarkets for
er endeavor, it usually isn’t enough to break every particular niche. As Anderson wrote,
even if you want to make what you’re doing a “We are all different, with different wants and
livelihood. You need to build in some support needs, and the Internet now has a place for all
for the general operation. This extra bit looks of them in the way that physical markets did
different for everyone, but importantly, in not.”7 We are no longer limited to what appeals
nearly all cases for those Made with Creative to the masses.
Commons, the definition of “enough money”
looks a lot different than it does in the world While finding “your people” online is theo-
of venture capital and stock options. It is more retically easier than in the analog world, as a
about sustainability and less about unlimited practical matter it can still be difficult to ac-
growth and profit. SparkFun founder Nathan tually get noticed. The Internet is a firehose
Seidle told us, “Business model is a really gran- of content, one that only grows larger by the
diose word for it. It is really just about keeping minute. As a content creator, not only are you
the operation going day to day.” competing for attention against more content
creators than ever before, you are competing
This book is a testament to the notion that it against creativity generated outside the mar-
is possible to make money while using CC li- ket as well.8 Anderson wrote, “The greatest
censes and CC-licensed content, but we are change of the past decade has been the shift
still very much at an experimental stage. The in time people spend consuming amateur con-
creators, organizations, and businesses we tent instead of professional content.”9 To top
profile in this book are blazing the trail and it all off, you have to compete against the rest
adapting in real time as they pursue this new of their lives, too—“friends, family, music play-
way of operating. lists, soccer games, and nights on the town.”10
Somehow, some way, you have to get noticed
There are, however, plenty of ways in which by the right people.
CC licensing can be good for business in fairly
When you come to the Internet armed
with an all-rights-reserved mentality from the
start, you are often restricting access to your
work before there is even any demand for it. In

22 Made With Creative Commons

many cases, requiring payment for your work has no impact on anyone else’s ability to make
is part of the traditional copyright system. use of it.
Even a tiny cost has a big effect on demand.
It’s called the penny gap—the large difference If you take some amount of copying and
in demand between something that is avail- sharing your work as a given, you can invest
able at the price of one cent versus the price of your time and resources elsewhere, rather
zero.11 That doesn’t mean it is wrong to charge than wasting them on playing a cat and mouse
money for your content. It simply means you game with people who want to copy and share
need to recognize the effect that doing so will your work. Lizzy Jongma from the Rijksmu-
have on demand. The same principle applies seum said, “We could spend a lot of money
to restricting access to copy the work. If your trying to protect works, but people are going
problem is how to get discovered and find to do it anyway. And they will use bad-quali-
“your people,” prohibiting people from copy- ty versions.” Instead, they started releasing
ing your work and sharing it with others is high-resolution digital copies of their collec-
counterproductive. tion into the public domain and making them
available for free on their website. For them,
Of course, it’s not that being discovered by sharing was a form of quality control over the
people who like your work will make you rich— copies that were inevitably being shared on-
far from it. But as Cory Doctorow says, “Recog- line. Doing this meant forgoing the revenue
nition is one of many necessary preconditions they previously got from selling digital images.
for artistic success.”12 But Lizzy says that was a small price to pay for
all of the opportunities that sharing unlocked
Choosing not to spend time and energy re- for them.
stricting access to your work and policing in-
fringement also builds goodwill. Lumen Learn- Being Made with Creative Commons
ing, a for-profit company that publishes online means you stop thinking about ways to arti-
educational materials, made an early decision ficially make your content scarce, and instead
not to prevent students from accessing their leverage it as the potentially abundant re-
content, even in the form of a tiny paywall, be- source it is.14 When you see information abun-
cause it would negatively impact student suc- dance as a feature, not a bug, you start think-
cess in a way that would undermine the social ing about the ways to use the idling capacity of
mission behind what they do. They believe this your content to your advantage. As my friend
decision has generated an immense amount and colleague Eric Steuer once said, “Using CC
of goodwill within the community. licenses shows you get the Internet.”

It is not just that restricting access to your Cory Doctorow says it costs him nothing
work may undermine your social mission. It when other people make copies of his work,
also may alienate the people who most value and it opens the possibility that he might get
your creative work. If people like your work, something in return.15 Similarly, the makers of
their natural instinct will be to share it with the Arduino boards knew it was impossible to
others. But as David Bollier wrote, “Our natu- stop people from copying their hardware, so
ral human impulses to imitate and share—the they decided not to even try and instead look
essence of culture—have been criminalized.”13 for the benefits of being open. For them, the
result is one of the most ubiquitous pieces of
The fact that copying can carry criminal hardware in the world, with a thriving online
penalties undoubtedly deters copying it, but community of tinkerers and innovators that
copying with the click of a button is too easy have done things with their work they never
and convenient to ever fully stop it. Try as the could have done otherwise.
copyright industry might to persuade us other-
wise, copying a copyrighted work just doesn’t There are all kinds of way to leverage the
feel like stealing a loaf of bread. And, of course, power of sharing and remix to your benefit.
that’s because it isn’t. Sharing a creative work Here are a few.

Made With Creative Commons 23

Use CC to grow a larger audience Use CC to get attribution and name
Putting a Creative Commons license on your recognition
content won’t make it automatically go viral, Every Creative Commons license requires that
but eliminating legal barriers to copying the credit be given to the author, and that reus-
work certainly can’t hurt the chances that your ers supply a link back to the original source
work will be shared. The CC license symbolizes of the material. CC0, not a license but a tool
that sharing is welcome. It can act as a little tap used to put work in the public domain, does
on the shoulder to those who come across the not make attribution a legal requirement, but
work—a nudge to copy the work if they have many communities still give credit as a matter
any inkling of doing so. All things being equal, of best practices and social norms. In fact, it
if one piece of content has a sign that says is social norms, rather than the threat of legal
Share and the other says Don’t Share (which enforcement, that most often motivate peo-
is what “©” means), which do you think people ple to provide attribution and otherwise com-
are more likely to share? ply with the CC license terms anyway. This is
the mark of any well-functioning community,
The Conversation is an online news site with within both the marketplace and the society at
in-depth articles written by academics who are large.19 CC licenses reflect a set of wishes on
experts on particular topics. All of the articles the part of creators, and in the vast majority
are CC-licensed, and they are copied and re- of circumstances, people are naturally inclined
shared on other sites by design. This proliferat- to follow those wishes. This is particularly the
ing effect, which they track, is a central part of case for something as straightforward and
the value to their academic authors who want consistent with basic notions of fairness as
to reach as many readers as possible. providing credit.

The idea that more eyeballs equates with The fact that the name of the creator fol-
more success is a form of the max strategy, lows a CC-licensed work makes the licenses an
adopted by Google and other technology com- important means to develop a reputation or, in
panies. According to Google’s Eric Schmidt, the corporate speak, a brand. The drive to associ-
idea is simple: “Take whatever it is you are do- ate your name with your work is not just based
ing and do it at the max in terms of distribu- on commercial motivations, it is fundamental
tion. The other way of saying this is that since to authorship. Knowledge Unlatched is a non-
marginal cost of distribution is free, you might profit that helps to subsidize the print produc-
as well put things everywhere.”16 This strate- tion of CC-licensed academic texts by pooling
gy is what often motivates companies to make contributions from libraries around the United
their products and services free (i.e., no cost), States. The CEO, Frances Pinter, says that the
but the same logic applies to making content Creative Commons license on the works has
freely shareable. Because CC-licensed content a huge value to authors because reputation is
is free (as in cost) and can be freely copied, CC the most important currency for academics.
licensing makes it even more accessible and Sharing with CC is a way of having the most
likely to spread. people see and cite your work.

If you are successful in reaching more Attribution can be about more than just
users, readers, listeners, or other consumers receiving credit. It can also be about estab-
of your work, you can start to benefit from the lishing provenance. People naturally want to
bandwagon effect. The simple fact that there know where content came from—the source
are other people consuming or following your of a work is sometimes just as interesting as
work spurs others to want to do the same.17 the work itself. Opendesk is a platform for fur-
This is, in part, because we simply have a ten- niture designers to share their designs. Con-
dency to engage in herd behavior, but it is also sumers who like those designs can then get
because a large following is at least a partial matched with local makers who turn the de-
indicator of quality or usefulness.18

24 Made With Creative Commons

signs into real-life furniture. The fact that I, sit- In some cases, endeavors that are Made
ting in the middle of the United States, can pick with Creative Commons do not even need
out a design created by a designer in Tokyo dedicated marketing teams or marketing bud-
and then use a maker within my own commu- gets. Cards Against Humanity is a CC-licensed
nity to transform the design into something card game available as a free download. And
tangible is part of the power of their platform. because of this (thanks to the CC license on
The provenance of the design is a special part the game), the creators say it is one of the
of the product. best-marketed games in the world, and they
have never spent a dime on marketing. The
Knowing the source of a work is also critical textbook publisher OpenStax has also avoid-
to ensuring its credibility. Just as a trademark ed hiring a marketing team. Their products are
is designed to give consumers a way to identify free, or cheaper to buy in the case of physical
the source and quality of a particular good and copies, which makes them much more attrac-
service, knowing the author of a work gives the tive to students who then demand them from
public a way to assess its credibility. In a time their universities. They also partner with ser-
when online discourse is plagued with misin- vice providers who build atop the CC-licensed
formation, being a trusted information source content and, in turn, spend money and re-
is more valuable than ever. sources marketing those services (and by ex-
tension, the OpenStax textbooks).
Use CC-licensed content as a marketing
tool Use CC to enable hands-on engagement
As we will cover in more detail later, many en- with your work
deavors that are Made with Creative Com- The great promise of Creative Commons li-
mons make money by providing a product censing is that it signifies an embrace of remix
or service other than the CC-licensed work. culture. Indeed, this is the great promise of
Sometimes that other product or service is digital technology. The Internet opened up a
completely unrelated to the CC content. Other whole new world of possibilities for public par-
times it’s a physical copy or live performance ticipation in creative work.
of the CC content. In all cases, the CC content
can attract people to your other product or Four of the six CC licenses enable reusers to
service. take apart, build upon, or otherwise adapt the
work. Depending on the context, adaptation
Knowledge Unlatched’s Pinter told us she can mean wildly different things—translating,
has seen time and again how offering CC-li- updating, localizing, improving, transforming.
censed content—that is, digitally for free—ac- It enables a work to be customized for partic-
tually increases sales of the printed goods be- ular needs, uses, people, and communities,
cause it functions as a marketing tool. We see which is another distinct value to offer the
this phenomenon regularly with famous art- public.21 Adaptation is more game changing in
work. The Mona Lisa is likely the most recog- some contexts than others. With educational
nizable painting on the planet. Its ubiquity materials, the ability to customize and update
has the effect of catalyzing interest in seeing the content is critically important for its use-
the painting in person, and in owning physical fulness. For photography, the ability to adapt a
goods with the image. Abundant copies of the photo is less important.
content often entice more demand, not blunt
it. Another example came with the advent of This is a way to counteract a potential
the radio. Although the music industry did not downside of the abundance of free and open
see it coming (and fought it!), free music on the content described above. As Anderson wrote
radio functioned as advertising for the paid in Free, “People often don’t care as much about
version people bought in music stores.20 Free things they don’t pay for, and as a result they
can be a form of promotion. don’t think as much about how they consume

Made With Creative Commons 25

them.”22 If even the tiny act of volition of pay- philanthropic institutions, governments, or
ing one penny for something changes our concerned individuals, provide money to the
perception of that thing, then surely the act organization out of a sense of pure altruism.
of remixing it enhances our perception expo- This is the way traditional nonprofit funding
nentially.23 We know that people will pay more operates.28 But in many cases, the revenue
for products they had a part in creating.24 And streams used by endeavors that are Made
we know that creating something, no matter with Creative Commons are directly tied to
what quality, brings with it a type of creative the value they generate, where the recipient
satisfaction that can never be replaced by con- is paying for the value they receive like any
suming something created by someone else.25 standard market transaction. In still other
cases, rather than the quid pro quo exchange
Actively engaging with the content helps us of money for value that typically drives market
avoid the type of aimless consumption that transactions, the recipient gives money out of
anyone who has absentmindedly scrolled a sense of reciprocity.
through their social-media feeds for an hour
knows all too well. In his book, Cognitive Sur- Most who are Made with Creative Com-
plus, Clay Shirky says, “To participate is to act mons use a variety of methods to bring in rev-
as if your presence matters, as if, when you see enue, some market-based and some not. One
something or hear something, your response common strategy is using grant funding for
is part of the event.”26 Opening the door to content creation when research-and-develop-
your content can get people more deeply tied ment costs are particularly high, and then find-
to your work. ing a different revenue stream (or streams) for
ongoing expenses. As Shirky wrote, “The trick
Use CC to differentiate yourself is in knowing when markets are an optimal
Operating under a traditional copyright regime way of organizing interactions and when they
usually means operating under the rules of are not.”29
establishment players in the media. Business
strategies that are embedded in the tradition- Our case studies explore in more detail the
al copyright system, like using digital rights various revenue-generating mechanisms used
management (DRM) and signing exclusivity by the creators, organizations, and businesses
contracts, can tie the hands of creators, often we interviewed. There is nuance hidden within
at the expense of the creator’s best interest.27 the specific ways each of them makes money,
Being Made with Creative Commons means so it is a bit dangerous to generalize too much
you can function without those barriers and, about what we learned. Nonetheless, zooming
in many cases, use the increased openness as out and viewing things from a higher level of
a competitive advantage. David Harris from abstraction can be instructive.
OpenStax said they specifically pursue strate-
gies they know that traditional publishers can- Market-based revenue streams
not. “Don’t go into a market and play by the in- In the market, the central question when de-
cumbent rules,” David said. “Change the rules termining how to bring in revenue is what val-
of engagement.” ue people are willing to pay for.30 By definition,
if you are Made with Creative Commons, the
Making Money content you provide is available for free and
not a market commodity. Like the ubiquitous
Like any moneymaking endeavor, those that freemium business model, any possible mar-
are Made with Creative Commons have to ket transaction with a consumer of your con-
generate some type of value for their audi- tent has to be based on some added value you
ence or customers. Sometimes that value is provide.31
subsidized by funders who are not actually
beneficiaries of that value. Funders, whether In many ways, this is the way of the future
for all content-driven endeavors. In the market,

26 Made With Creative Commons

value lives in things that are scarce. Because MARKET-BASEDas a marketing tool for the paid product or
the Internet makes a universe of content avail- service.
able to all of us for free, it is difficult to get peo- MARKET-BASED
ple to pay for content online. The struggling Here are the most common high-level
newspaper industry is a testament to this fact. categories.
This is compounded by the fact that at least
some amount of copying is probably inevita- Providing a custom service to con-
ble. That means you may end up competing sumers of your work
with free versions of your own content, wheth- In this age of information abundance, we
er you condone it or not.32 If people can easi- don’t lack for content. The trick is find-
ly find your content for free, getting people to ing content that matches our needs and
buy it will be difficult, particularly in a context wants, so customized services are par-
where access to content is more important ticularly valuable. As Anderson wrote,
than owning it. In Free, Anderson wrote, “Copy- “Commodity information (everybody
right protection schemes, whether coded into gets the same version) wants to be free.
either law or software, are simply holding up a Customized information (you get some-
price against the force of gravity.” thing unique and meaningful to you)
wants to be expensive.”34 This can be
Of course, this doesn’t mean that con- anything from the artistic and cultural
tent-driven endeavors have no future in the consulting services provided by Ártica to
traditional marketplace. In Free, Anderson ex- the custom-song business of Jonathan
plains how when one product or service be- “Song-A-Day” Mann.
comes free, as information and content largely
have in the digital age, other things become Charging for the physical copy
more valuable. “Every abundance creates a In his book about maker culture, An-
new scarcity,” he wrote. You just have to find derson characterizes this model as giv-
some way other than the content to provide ing away the bits and selling the atoms
value to your audience or customers. As An- (where bits refers to digital content and
derson says, “It’s easy to compete with Free: atoms refer to a physical object).35 This is
simply offer something better or at least dif- particularly successful in domains where
ferent from the free version.”33 the digital version of the content isn’t as
valuable as the analog version, like book
In light of this reality, in some ways endeav- publishing where a significant subset of
ors that are Made with Creative Commons people still prefer reading something
are at a level playing field with all content-based they can hold in their hands. Or in do-
endeavors in the digital age. In fact, they may mains where the content isn’t useful
even have an advantage because they can use until it is in physical form, like furniture
the abundance of content to derive revenue designs. In those situations, a significant
from something scarce. They can also benefit portion of consumers will pay for the con-
from the goodwill that stems from the values venience of having someone else put the
behind being Made with Creative Commons. physical version together for them. Some
endeavors squeeze even more out of this
For content creators and distributors, there revenue stream by using a Creative Com-
are nearly infinite ways to provide value to the mons license that only allows noncom-
consumers of your work, above and beyond mercial uses, which means no one else
the value that lives within your free digital con- can sell physical copies of their work in
tent. Often, the CC-licensed content functions competition with them. This strategy of
reserving commercial rights can be par-
ticularly important for items like books,

Made With Creative Commons 27

where every printed copy of the same MARKET-BASEDwilling to pay for—there are other services you
work is likely to be the same quality, so it can provide as well.
MARKET-BASEDis harder to differentiate one publishing
service from another. On the other hand, Charging advertisers or sponsors
MARKET-BASEDfor items like furniture or electronics, theMARKET-BASEDThe traditional model of subsidizing free
provider of the physical goods can com- content is advertising. In this version of
pete with other providers of the same MARKET-BASEDmulti-sided platforms, advertisers pay
works based on quality, service, or other for the opportunity to reach the set of
traditional business principles. eyeballs the content creators provide in
the form of their audience.37 The Internet
Charging for the in-person version has made this model more difficult be-
As anyone who has ever gone to a con- cause the number of potential channels
cert will tell you, experiencing creativity available to reach those eyeballs has be-
in person is a completely different expe- come essentially infinite.38 Nonetheless,
rience from consuming a digital copy on it remains a viable revenue stream for
your own. Far from acting as a substitute many content creators, including those
for face-to-face interaction, CC-licensed who are Made with Creative Commons.
content can actually create demand for Often, instead of paying to display adver-
the in-person version of experience. You tising, the advertiser pays to be an official
can see this effect when people go view sponsor of particular content or projects,
original art in person or pay to attend a or of the overall endeavor.
talk or training course.
Charging your content creators
Selling merchandise Another type of multisided platform is
In many cases, people who like your work where the content creators themselves
will pay for products demonstrating a pay to be featured on the platform. Ob-
connection to your work. As a child of viously, this revenue stream is only avail-
the 1980s, I can personally attest to the able to those who rely on work created,
power of a good concert T-shirt. This can at least in part, by others. The most well-
also be an important revenue stream for known version of this model is the “au-
museums and galleries. thor-processing charge” of open-access
journals like those published by the Pub-
Sometimes the way to find a market-based lic Library of Science, but there are other
revenue stream is by providing value to peo- variations. The Conversation is primar-
ple other than those who consume your CC-li- ily funded by a university-membership
censed content. In these revenue streams, the model, where universities pay to have
free content is being subsidized by an entirely their faculties participate as writers of
different category of people or businesses. Of- the content on the Conversation website.
ten, those people or businesses are paying to
access your main audience. The fact that the Charging a transaction fee
content is free increases the size of the audi- This is a version of a traditional business
ence, which in turn makes the offer more valu- model based on brokering transactions
able to the paying customers. This is a varia- between parties.39 Curation is an import-
tion of a traditional business model built on ant element of this model. Platforms like
free called multi-sided platforms.36 Access to the Noun Project add value by wading
your audience isn’t the only thing people are through CC-licensed content to curate
a high-quality set and then derive reve-
nue when creators of that content make

28 Made With Creative Commons

MARKET-BASEDtransactions with customers. Other plat-building a relationship, and then eventually
forms make money when service pro- finding some money that flows back out of a
MARKET-BASEDviders transact with their customers; forRECIPROCITY-BASEDsense of reciprocity. While some look like tra-
example, Opendesk makes money every ditional nonprofit funding models, they aren’t
time someone on their site pays a mak- charity. The endeavor exchange value with
er to make furniture based on one of the people, just not necessarily synchronous-
designs on the platform. ly or in a way that requires that those values
be equal. As David Bollier wrote in Think Like
Providing a service to your creators a Commoner, “There is no self-serving calcula-
As mentioned above, endeavors can tion of whether the value given and received is
make money by providing customized strictly equal.”
services to their users. Platforms can un-
dertake a variation of this service model This should be a familiar dynamic—it is the
directed at the creators that provide the way you deal with your friends and family. We
content they feature. The data platforms give without regard for what and when we will
Figure.NZ and Figshare both capitalize get back. David Bollier wrote, “Reciprocal social
on this model by providing paid tools to exchange lies at the heart of human identity,
help their users make the data they con- community and culture. It is a vital brain func-
tribute to the platform more discover- tion that helps the human species survive and
able and reusable. evolve.”

Licensing a trademark What is rare is to incorporate this sort of rela-
Finally, some that are Made with Cre- tionship into an endeavor that also engages with
ative Commons make money by sell- the market.40 We almost can’t help but think of
ing use of their trademarks. Well known relationships in the market as being centered on
brands that consumers associate with an even-steven exchange of value.41
quality, credibility, or even an ethos can
license that trademark to companies that Memberships and individual
want to take advantage of that goodwill. donations
By definition, trademarks are scarce be- While memberships and donations are
cause they represent a particular source traditional nonprofit funding models, in
of a good or service. Charging for the the Made with Creative Commons con-
ability to use that trademark is a way of text, they are directly tied to the recipro-
deriving revenue from something scarce cal relationship that is cultivated with the
while taking advantage of the abundance beneficiaries of their work. The bigger
of CC content. the pool of those receiving value from
the content, the more likely this strategy
Reciprocity-based revenue streams will work, given that only a small percent-
Even if we set aside grant funding, we found age of people are likely to contribute.
that the traditional economic framework of Since using CC licenses can grease the
understanding the market failed to fully cap- wheels for content to reach more people,
ture the ways the endeavors we analyzed were this strategy can be more effective for
making money. It was not simply about mone- endeavors that are Made with Creative
tizing scarcity. Commons. The greater the argument
that the content is a public good or that
Rather than devising a scheme to get peo- the entire endeavor is furthering a social
ple to pay money in exchange for some direct mission, the more likely this strategy is to
value provided to them, many of the revenue succeed.
streams were more about providing value,

Made With Creative Commons 29

RECIPROCITY-BASED The pay-what-you-want model available to everyone for free. Libraries
In the pay-what-you-want model, the with bigger budgets tend to give more
RECIPROCITY-BASED beneficiary of Creative Commons con- out of a sense of commitment to the li-
tent is invited to give—at any amount brary community and to the idea of open
they can and feel is appropriate, based access generally.
on the public and personal value they
feel is generated by the open content. Making Human Connections
Critically, these models are not touted as
“buying” something free. They are simi- Regardless of how they made money, in our
lar to a tip jar. People make financial con- interviews, we repeatedly heard language like
tributions as an act of gratitude. These “persuading people to buy” and “inviting peo-
models capitalize on the fact that we ple to pay.” We heard it even in connection
are naturally inclined to give money for with revenue streams that sit squarely within
things we value in the marketplace, even the market. Cory Doctorow told us, “I have to
in situations where we could find a way convince my readers that the right thing to do
to get it for free. is to pay me.” The founders of the for-profit
company Lumen Learning showed us the let-
Crowdfunding ter they send to those who opt not to pay for
Crowdfunding models are based on re- the services they provide in connection with
couping the costs of creating and dis- their CC-licensed educational content. It isn’t
tributing content before the content is a cease-and-desist letter; it’s an invitation to
created. If the endeavor is Made with pay because it’s the right thing to do. This sort
Creative Commons, anyone who wants of behavior toward what could be considered
the work in question could simply wait nonpaying customers is largely unheard of in
until it’s created and then access it for the traditional marketplace. But it seems to be
free. That means, for this model to work, part of the fabric of being Made with Creative
people have to care about more than Commons.
just receiving the work. They have to
want you to succeed. Amanda Palmer Nearly every endeavor we profiled relied, at
credits the success of her crowdfunding least in part, on people being invested in what
on Kickstarter and Patreon to the years they do. The closer the Creative Commons
she spent building her community and content is to being “the product,” the more
creating a connection with her fans. She pronounced this dynamic has to be. Rather
wrote in The Art of Asking, “Good art is than simply selling a product or service, they
made, good art is shared, help is offered, are making ideological, personal, and creative
ears are bent, emotions are exchanged, connections with the people who value what
the compost of real, deep connection is they do.
sprayed all over the fields. Then one day,
the artist steps up and asks for some- It took me a very long time to see how this
thing. And if the ground has been fertil- avoidance of thinking about what they do in
ized enough, the audience says, without pure market terms was deeply tied to being
hesitation: of course.” Made with Creative Commons.

Other types of crowdfunding rely on I came to the research with preconceived
a sense of responsibility that a partic- notions about what Creative Commons is and
ular community may feel. Knowledge what it means to be Made with Creative Com-
Unlatched pools funds from major U.S. mons. It turned out I was wrong on so many
libraries to subsidize CC-licensed aca- counts.
demic work that will be, by definition,
Obviously, being Made with Creative Com-
mons means using Creative Commons licens-
es. That much I knew. But in our interviews,
people spoke of so much more than copyright

30 Made With Creative Commons

permissions when they explained how sharing pouring their lives out on the page. For oth-
fit into what they do. I was thinking about shar- ers, it means showing their creative process,
ing too narrowly, and as a result, I was missing giving a glimpse into how they do what they
vast swaths of the meaning packed within Cre- do. As writer Austin Kleon wrote, “Our work
ative Commons. Rather than parsing the spe- doesn’t speak for itself. Human beings want to
cific and narrow role of the copyright license in know where things came from, how they were
the equation, it is important not to disaggre- made, and who made them. The stories you
gate the rest of what comes with sharing. You tell about the work you do have a huge effect
have to widen the lens. on how people feel and what they understand
about your work, and how people feel and
Being Made with Creative Commons is what they understand about your work affects
not just about the simple act of licensing a how they value it.”43
copyrighted work under a set of standardized
terms, but also about community, social good, A critical component to doing this effec-
contributing ideas, expressing a value system, tively is not worrying about being a “brand.”
working together. These components of shar- That means not being afraid to be vulnerable.
ing are hard to cultivate if you think about what Amanda Palmer says, “When you’re afraid of
you do in purely market terms. Decent social someone’s judgment, you can’t connect with
behavior isn’t as intuitive when we are doing them. You’re too preoccupied with the task of
something that involves monetary exchange. impressing them.” Not everyone is suited to
It takes a conscious effort to foster the context live life as an open book like Palmer, and that’s
for real sharing, based not strictly on imper- OK. There are a lot of ways to be human. The
sonal market exchange, but on connections trick is just avoiding pretense and the tempta-
with the people with whom you share—con- tion to artificially craft an image. People don’t
nections with you, with your work, with your just want the glossy version of you. They can’t
values, with each other. relate to it, at least not in a meaningful way.

The rest of this section will explore some of This advice is probably even more import-
the common strategies that creators, compa- ant for businesses and organizations because
nies, and organizations use to remind us that we instinctively conceive of them as nonhu-
there are humans behind every creative en- man (though in the United States, corporations
deavor. To remind us we have obligations to are people!). When corporations and organiza-
each other. To remind us what sharing really tions make the people behind them more ap-
looks like. parent, it reminds people that they are dealing
with something other than an anonymous cor-
Be human porate entity. In business-speak, this is about
Humans are social animals, which means we “humanizing your interactions” with the pub-
are naturally inclined to treat each other well.42 lic.44 But it can’t be a gimmick. You can’t fake
But the further removed we are from the per- being human.
son with whom we are interacting, the less car-
ing our behavior will be. While the Internet has Be open and accountable
democratized cultural production, increased Transparency helps people understand who
access to knowledge, and connected us in ex- you are and why you do what you do, but it also
traordinary ways, it can also make it easy for- inspires trust. Max Temkin of Cards Against
get we are dealing with another human. Humanity told us, “One of the most surpris-
ing things you can do in capitalism is just be
To counteract the anonymous and imper- honest with people.” That means sharing the
sonal tendencies of how we operate online, good and the bad. As Amanda Palmer wrote,
individual creators and corporations who use “You can fix almost anything by authentically
Creative Commons licenses work to demon- communicating.”45 It isn’t about trying to satis-
strate their humanity. For some, this means

Made With Creative Commons 31

fy everyone or trying to sugarcoat mistakes or together better than neoclassical economics
bad news, but instead about explaining your would predict.”51 When we acknowledge that
rationale and then being prepared to defend it people are often motivated by something oth-
when people are critical.46 er than financial self-interest, we design our
endeavors in ways that encourage and accen-
Being accountable does not mean operating tuate our social instincts.
on consensus. According to James Surowiec-
ki, consensus-driven groups tend to resort to Rather than trying to exert control over
lowest-common-denominator solutions and people’s behavior, this mode of operating re-
avoid the sort of candid exchange of ideas that quires a certain level of trust. We might not
cultivates healthy collaboration.47 Instead, it realize it, but our daily lives are already built
can be as simple as asking for input and then on trust. As Surowiecki wrote in The Wisdom of
giving context and explanation about deci- Crowds, “It’s impossible for a society to rely on
sions you make, even if soliciting feedback and law alone to make sure citizens act honestly
inviting discourse is time-consuming. If you and responsibly. And it’s impossible for any or-
don’t go through the effort to actually respond ganization to rely on contracts alone to make
to the input you receive, it can be worse than sure that its managers and workers live up to
not inviting input in the first place.48 But when their obligation.” Instead, we largely trust that
you get it right, it can guarantee the type of di- people—mostly strangers—will do what they
versity of thought that helps endeavors excel. are supposed to do.52 And most often, they do.
And it is another way to get people involved
and invested in what you do. Treat humans like, well, humans
For creators, treating people as humans
Design for the good actors means not treating them like fans. As Kleon
Traditional economics assumes people make says, “If you want fans, you have to be a fan
decisions based solely on their own econom- first.”53 Even if you happen to be one of the few
ic self-interest.49 Any relatively introspective to reach celebrity levels of fame, you are bet-
human knows this is a fiction—we are much ter off remembering that the people who fol-
more complicated beings with a whole range low your work are human, too. Cory Doctorow
of needs, emotions, and motivations. In fact, makes a point to answer every single email
we are hardwired to work together and ensure someone sends him. Amanda Palmer spends
fairness.50 Being Made with Creative Com- vast quantities of time going online to commu-
mons requires an assumption that people will nicate with her public, making a point to listen
largely act on those social motivations, motiva- just as much as she talks.54
tions that would be considered “irrational” in
an economic sense. As Knowledge Unlatched’s The same idea goes for businesses and or-
Pinter told us, “It is best to ignore people who ganizations. Rather than automating its cus-
try to scare you about free riding. That fear tomer service, the music platform Tribe of
is based on a very shallow view of what mo- Noise makes a point to ensure its employees
tivates human behavior.” There will always be have personal, one-on-one interaction with
people who will act in purely selfish ways, but users.
endeavors that are Made with Creative Com-
mons design for the good actors. When we treat people like humans, they typ-
ically return the gift in kind. It’s called karma.
The assumption that people will largely do But social relationships are fragile. It is all too
the right thing can be a self-fulfilling prophe- easy to destroy them if you make the mistake
cy. Shirky wrote in Cognitive Surplus, “Systems of treating people as anonymous customers
that assume people will act in ways that create or free labor.55 Platforms that rely on content
public goods, and that give them opportunities from contributors are especially at risk of cre-
and rewards for doing so, often let them work ating an exploitative dynamic. It is important
to find ways to acknowledge and pay back the

32 Made With Creative Commons

value that contributors generate. That does not or it may simply be a collection of like-minded
mean you can solve this problem by simply pay- people who get to know each other and ral-
ing contributors for their time or contributions. ly around common interests or beliefs.58 To a
As soon as we introduce money into a relation- certain extent, simply being Made with Cre-
ship—at least when it takes a form of paying ative Commons automatically brings with it
monetary value in exchange for other value— some element of community, by helping con-
it can dramatically change the dynamic.56 nect you to like-minded others who recognize
and are drawn to the values symbolized by
State your principles and stick to them using CC.
Being Made with Creative Commons makes
a statement about who you are and what you To be sustainable, though, you have to work
do. The symbolism is powerful. Using Creative to nurture community. People have to care—
Commons licenses demonstrates adherence about you and each other. One critical piece to
to a particular belief system, which generates this is fostering a sense of belonging. As Jono
goodwill and connects like-minded people to Bacon writes in The Art of Community, “If there
your work. Sometimes people will be drawn to is no belonging, there is no community.” For
endeavors that are Made with Creative Com- Amanda Palmer and her band, that meant cre-
mons as a way of demonstrating their own ating an accepting and inclusive environment
commitment to the Creative Commons value where people felt a part of their “weird little
system, akin to a political statement. Other family.”59 For organizations like Red Hat, that
times people will identify and feel connected means connecting around common beliefs
with an endeavor’s separate social mission. or goals. As the CEO Jim Whitehurst wrote in
Often both. The Open Organization, “Tapping into passion
is especially important in building the kinds
The expression of your values doesn’t have of participative communities that drive open
to be implicit. In fact, many of the people we organizations.”60
interviewed talked about how important it is
to state your guiding principles up front. Lu- Communities that collaborate together
men Learning attributes a lot of their success take deliberate planning. Surowiecki wrote, “It
to having been outspoken about the funda- takes a lot of work to put the group together.
mental values that guide what they do. As a It’s difficult to ensure that people are working
for-profit company, they think their expressed in the group’s interest and not in their own.
commitment to low-income students and And when there’s a lack of trust between the
open licensing has been critical to their cred- members of the group (which isn’t surprising
ibility in the OER (open educational resources) given that they don’t really know each other),
community in which they operate. considerable energy is wasted trying to deter-
mine each other’s bona fides.”61 Building true
When your end goal is not about making a community requires giving people within the
profit, people trust that you aren’t just trying community the power to create or influence
to extract value for your own gain. People no- the rules that govern the community.62 If the
tice when you have a sense of purpose that rules are created and imposed in a top-down
transcends your own self-interest.57 It attracts manner, people feel like they don’t have a
committed employees, motivates contribu- voice, which in turn leads to disengagement.
tors, and builds trust.
Community takes work, but working togeth-
Build a community er, or even simply being connected around
Endeavors that are Made with Creative Com- common interests or values, is in many ways
mons thrive when community is built around what sharing is about.
what they do. This may mean a community col-
laborating together to create something new,

Made With Creative Commons 33

Give more to the commons than you take globe. Chris Anderson calls it the Long Tail
Conventional wisdom in the marketplace dic- of talent.66 But to make collaboration work,
tates that people should try to extract as much the group has to be effective at what it is do-
money as possible from resources. This is es- ing, and the people within the group have to
sentially what defines so much of the so-called find satisfaction from being involved.67 This
sharing economy. In an article on the Harvard is easier to facilitate for some types of cre-
Business Review website called “The Sharing ative work than it is for others. Groups tied
Economy Isn’t about Sharing at All,” authors together online collaborate best when people
Giana Eckhardt and Fleura Bardhi explained can work independently and asynchronously,
how the anonymous market-driven trans- and particularly for larger groups with loose
actions in most sharing-economy businesses ties, when contributors can make simple im-
are purely about monetizing access.63 As Lisa provements without a particularly heavy time
Gansky put it in her book The Mesh, the prima- commitment.68
ry strategy of the sharing economy is to sell the
same product multiple times, by selling access As the success of Wikipedia demonstrates,
rather than ownership.64 That is not sharing. editing an online encyclopedia is exactly the
sort of activity that is perfect for massive co-
Sharing requires adding as much or more creation because small, incremental edits
value to the ecosystem than you take. You made by a diverse range of people acting
can’t simply treat open content as a free pool on their own are immensely valuable in the
of resources from which to extract value. Part aggregate. Those same sorts of small contri-
of giving back to the ecosystem is contributing butions would be less useful for many other
content back to the public under CC licenses. types of creative work, and people are in-
But it doesn’t have to just be about creating herently less motivated to contribute when
content; it can be about adding value in oth- it doesn’t appear that their efforts will make
er ways. The social blogging platform Medium much of a difference.69
provides value to its community by incentiv-
izing good behavior, and the result is an on- It is easy to romanticize the opportunities
line space with remarkably high-quality user- for global cocreation made possible by the In-
generated content and limited trolling.65 ternet, and, indeed, the successful examples
Opendesk contributes to its community by of it are truly incredible and inspiring. But in a
committing to help its designers make money, wide range of circumstances—perhaps more
in part by actively curating and displaying their often than not—community cocreation is not
work on its platform effectively. part of the equation, even within endeavors
built on CC content. Shirky wrote, “Some-
In all cases, it is important to openly ac- times the value of professional work trumps
knowledge the amount of value you add ver- the value of amateur sharing or a feeling of
sus that which you draw on that was created belonging.70 The textbook publisher Open-
by others. Being transparent about this builds Stax, which distributes all of its material for
credibility and shows you are a contributing free under CC licensing, is an example of this
player in the commons. When your endeavor dynamic. Rather than tapping the communi-
is making money, that also means apportion- ty to help cocreate their college textbooks,
ing financial compensation in a way that re- they invest a significant amount of time and
flects the value contributed by others, provid- money to develop professional content. For
ing more to contributors when the value they individual creators, where the creative work is
add outweighs the value provided by you. the basis for what they do, community cocre-
ation is only rarely a part of the picture. Even
Involve people in what you do musician Amanda Palmer, who is famous for
Thanks to the Internet, we can tap into the her openness and involvement with her fans,
talents and expertise of people around the said, “The only department where I wasn’t

34 Made With Creative Commons