I'm always amazed when people accuse us here at Techdirt of being "anti-creator." Considering how much time and effort we spend showing content creators how they can make more money, and highlighting examples of cool and profitable new business models, it's one of the more bizarre criticisms. And, yet, some people seem to assume that anyone who dares to suggest any path that is not full-on extreme pro-copyright must be "anti-creator." The blog Technollama has a really stunning strange example of this, where a woman who is apparently a newly minted lawyer tells the blogger that "anyone who supports Creative Commons is by definition anti-creators' rights"
followed up by this whopper:
"Creative Commons has put huge numbers of creatives out of business."
Wow. I mean, we've seen ASCAP lash out
at Creative Commons before, but I really can't recall seeing someone state a position that was more ignorant. Creative Commons doesn't put any creatives out of business. It's simply a licensing choice for copyright holders. I'm at a loss as to how that can be against creators' rights at all. It's the opposite. It makes it easier for them to make use of those rights.