[cc-community] This is curious
Jordan S Hatcher
jordan at opencontentlawyer.com
Wed Oct 10 03:02:03 EDT 2007
On 10 Oct 2007, at 01:25, elliott bledsoe wrote:
> this is the case for america, but not all countries have the same
> law related to rights in databases. for example, here in australia
> copyright exists in the way that data is compiled, which is why the
> telephone book is copyrightable in australia. as such, a cc licence
> on a database here in australia is applicable. you'd really have to
> look at the laws of each country to find out applicability.
>
> On 10/10/2007, at 10:16 am, Mike Linksvayer wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 16:43 -0500, Eric Norman wrote:
>>> SNIP
>>> So what's curious? Well, the datasets that they're talking about
>>> are
>>> just a compilation of facts. They're not creative expression.
>>> So what's the deal with a
>>> CC license?
>>>
>>> SNIP
>>> Let me put it this way. I make a copy of their facts and use them
>>> for commercial purposes,
>>> What can they do about it?
>>>
>>> Does saying that their facts are offered under their (modified)
>>> license override my rights
>>> under copyright law?
>>
>> I'm not qualified to have an opinion, but the Science Commons
>> Databases
>> and CC FAQ covers this extensively, see
>> http://sciencecommons.org/resources/faq/databases/
This is *exactly one of the issues that the Open Data Commons
Database Licence was created, as it addresses some of the issues
unique to databases, such as Australia's low threshold of
originality, the EU database right, and others. The licences are in a
draft stage, so they aren't ready for use yet, but hopefully soon
will be.
Open Data Commons Database Licence
<http://www.opencontentlawyer.com/open-data/open-database-licence/>
Open Data Commons Factual Info Licence
<http://www.opencontentlawyer.com/open-data/open-data-commons-factual-
info-licence/>
Open Data Commons Home
<http://www.opencontentlawyer.com/open-data/>
For the example you mentioned, they seem to be relying on contract,
rather than copyright, to cover the datasets. The ODC set of licences
separate out the database, (depending on the jurisdiction) protected
by copyright or database rights, from the contents of the database.
For factual information, the FIL has a statement that "facts are
free" but just in case there is a copyright claim (in Australia for
example) then you have a licence for that too. It is modeled on the
BSD or MIT family of open source / free software licences. Also, the
Database Licence is modeled on many of issues brought to light in the
Science Commons Database FAQ.
I'd definitely welcome any comments, either on or off list, on my
website, or on the mailing list set up to discuss the licence:
<http://lists.opencontentlawyer.com/listinfo.cgi/tcl-discuss-
opencontentlawyer.com>
Thanks!
~Jordan
____
Mr. Jordan S Hatcher, JD, LLM
jordan at opencontentlawyer dot com
OC Blog: http://opencontentlawyer.com
IP/IT Blog: http://twitchgamer.net
Open Data Commons
http://www.opencontentlawyer.com/open-data/
Usage of Creative Commons by cultural heritage organisations
http://www.eduserv.org.uk/foundation/studies/cc2007
More information about the cc-community
mailing list