[cc-community] BY-SA license in the UK has non-waivered collection society fees?

drew Roberts zotz at 100jamz.com
Sat Aug 16 18:48:51 EDT 2008


On Saturday 16 August 2008 17:21:41 Kevin Phillips (home) wrote:
> Headsup to Drew and Jonathan in particular, following the recent
> discussions about NC and the differences between jurisdictions, here's a
> difference I spotted with the unported/USA and UK BY-SA license....
>
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/uk/legalcode
>
> See 2.5
>
> Am I correct in thinking this is a pretty major difference between the USA
> and UK licenses?  Presumably this is why web sites tend to us the
> "unported" licenses, so as not to introduce incompatibilities?  Does this
> ultimately mean that I'd best stick with unported licenses (being UK based
> mostly) to ensure maximum compatibility for those remixing my work?

Wow!

"2.5. All rights not expressly granted by the Licensor are hereby reserved, 
including but not limited to, the exclusive right to collect, whether 
individually or via a licensing body, such as a collecting society, royalties 
for any use of the Work which results in commercial advantage or private 
monetary compensation."

That seems seriously out of place in a BY-SA license. Fine for NC, but this is 
crazy on first glance from someone sitting where I am.

What is the justification for this anyone? The only reason I can see is if it 
is not possible to waive them in the UK. Is that the case? If so, perhaps it 
would be helpful to point out that they would be waived except that the law 
does not allow it and that they will be waived if the law should change in 
the future?

However, once again, I would ask that we consider only waiving the fees when 
it will actually benefit the user if we do so. I see no reason to ever waive 
the fees to benefit the CS or their members when it will not help us or our 
licensees.

Also, doesn't this throw a serious monkey wrench into the reciprocity of 
BY-SA? One person releases under a port that waives, one under a port that 
doesn't. They each make use of the other's work in their own "port" countries 
and in the other person's country. We now have an inequitable situation don't 
we?

Thoughts?
>
> Kevin

all the best,

drew




More information about the cc-community mailing list