A set of Free multimedia guidelines (similar to the Debian Free software Guidelines) should be developed for the establishment of a freer, more open, more commons-based multimedia and multimedia license ecosystem. Yes, you already have stuff like CC-by, CC-by-SA and GFDL, but they're only the tip of the iceberg.

But first, let's look at multimedia formats and their openness. Most files written or compiled in markup languages (of various types, including XML-based MLs) can be edited with your favorite text editor (notepad.exe, Vim, emacs, etc.) to your heart's desire and brain's knowledge, while most popular sound, image, video or animation file formats, which aren't created in any particular standard language, can't be edited in like manner; instead, you have to edit the file using exclusively GUI-based drag-and-drop management tools.

So that's the first thing to consider about truly "free" multimedia: if it is a free format, why can't you edit it with a text editor?

Second, when the file (say, SWF) is being indexed by a search bot (say, Google's search bot), does it returnreadable text sentences, or does it only return a jumbled, mishmashed set of barely-legible text words?

The first goal of an open file format (markup language formats in particular) is to allow manipulation and visualization of the constitution of the file by both human and robot/software hands and eyes. It shouldn't have to be one or the other. Thus, most image, sound, animation or video files can't be considered "open" in any way, although they can be free or unfree to render.

Third, is the file format restricted to a certain runtime or player? In other words, is no other runtime or player (FOSS or no) allowed to render/play the file format? And if someone is allowed to create a third-party player or runtime, does the creator need to purchase the rights to create the payer or runtime from the patent holders?

And if the file is created with an application using that third-party player or runtime, does render correctly in the main file format proprietor's designated player or runtime, or does a file created using the "official" player or runtime render correctly in the third-party player or runtime (or at least the necessary APIs for implementing the most recent iterations of the file format correctly are made available)?

If not, then the file format is not "free", either.

So we need both free and open source multimedia formats and licenses, and we needed them last year.