An important part of developing new ideas is the the collaboration of peers.
Large groups of collaborative authors may disintegrate the need for a single author.
The creation and the collaboration of creative works on community forums invents a sort of "protected" writer's commons, which can be shared with outsiders or other communities.
The collaboration of a piece of writing, when published, does not always "share" the wealth of the piece.
Collaborative writing takes the form of sharing ideas, giving feedback, or writing a part of the final piece. What levels of collaborations deserve a sort of "shared authorship?" What would sharing the role of author mean for the idea behind the single author? Would it aid in the idea of the disintegrating author?
If idea's are willingly shared, what does that do to single authorship? What level of sharing takes away the role of the single author as being the "inventor" or "initiator" of something new an creative?
What does this say about creativity itself? Does creativity develop within a single person or is the core of creativity something that develops in many but put together by a few?
If creativity is not something that develops in just a single mind, how can it ever be owned? Would creativity itself be the commons? Does everything ever thought about as "Creative" naturally fall under the concepts of the "Creative Commons Copyright?"
Is creativity like open source? (Like Linux.)
How does this define inventiveness? Can there exist patents on new ideas that have been seeded by creativity? Do the results from creative collaboration become owned? Are they technically the remix of the original creative thoughts?