City of Stockholm <3 Creative Commons - you should too
Said it before, saying it again - Creative Commons is a founding part of the internet. Everybody should learn about it, use it, spread it, love it. There.
However, this is not the case. Everybody doesn't use Creative Commons. And everybody certainly doesn't understand it. I have recent examples of enormous blogs disrespecting the CC license by re-publishing CC content created by clients, without an attribution.
I realize the lack of attribution is due to the blog's fear of losing readers when linking out to the original source. However, this act hurts the CC license and the internet culture of sharing. And to be honest, it ticks me off.
What does make me happy is when a large organisation like the City of Stockholm starts using CC. Yesterday, the City Commissioner of sports and culture announced on her blog that the city is opening up there digital photo archive for everyone to use under CC.
The hidden collections of Stockholm should become more accessible for the residents. This is why the cultural board has decided to use the Creative Commons license system for the pictures in Stadsarkivet (The City Archive) and Stadsmuseet (The City Museum). This is the start of a policy process for the use of digital images from the collections of the City of Stockholm.
Let's salute this, and celebrate by spreading the word of Creative Commons.
2 
Comments to this article
The big difference with the license you refer to is that people are allowed to use the content, which you aren't with All rights reserved.
A more liberal CC license (and I'd guess more used as well) is when you are also allowed to mix or alter the original content as long as you attribute it.
To me this is a big part of what the internet is about - spreading and sharing of not only culture, but knowledge (e.g. universities on YouTube & Wikinomics), science (open source).
I think this will create a better world for everyone :).
Sounds great, but I am still a bit confused about CC, I mean "All rights reserved" is pretty straight forward. If you using CC you still have to state what type, I mean if you choose http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0 it's more or less "All right reserved" with a twist. Or?