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

Kevin Phillips (home) tacet at qmpublishing.com
Sun Aug 17 17:19:07 EDT 2008


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "drew Roberts" <zotz at 100jamz.com>
To: <cc-community at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2008 8:59 PM
Subject: Re: [cc-community] BY-SA license in the UK has 
non-waiveredcollection society fees?


> On Sunday 17 August 2008 14:27:57 Kevin Phillips (home) wrote:
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Terry Hancock" <hancock at anansispaceworks.com>
>> To: <cc-community at lists.ibiblio.org>
>> Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2008 5:41 PM
>> Subject: Re: [cc-community] BY-SA license in the UK has non-waivered
>> collection society fees?
>>
>> > drew Roberts wrote:
>> >> 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.
>> >
>> > OTOH, "SA" "expressly grants" rights to reuse the work commercially. So
>> > this would basically restrict anything that isn't granted by that part
>> > of the license.
>> >
>> > So maybe it isn't as far reaching as it sounds?
>>
>> As I've mentioned before (in other threads) it kind of makes more sense 
>> to
>> my simple mind that an SA license is non-waivered,
>
> Nah, this makes it non-Free and to my mind, makes the various SA ports
> non-alike and incompatible. I need serious clarification I think. If this 
> is,
> in fact, the way it seems to my first reading, I have serious problems 
> with
> the UK port and don't like people being able to make derivataves of my 
> works
> that I release under a port that has the waiver under the UK port.

See my last post for the sorry for the non-fusion.  I actually agree with 
you,
the sentence should have read "....SA licence is waivered".

So I second what you said, if indeed we're barking up the right tree.

> Wasn't there an effort a while back to have SA "OK"ed by debian? Wouldn't 
> this
> throw a major monkey wrench into that effort?

Wow.  I guess so.

> Under the BY-SA license, a person should be able to make any commercial or
> non-commercial use of the work so long as they meet the other terms /
> requirements of the license. Since it is a non-exclusive license, some may
> prefer to simplicity of dealing with a CS that they are already dealing 
> with
> anyway and using a license from the CS instead of the BY-SA license, but 
> that
> is different.

I agree.  In the discussion with Terry my mind wondered off into thinking 
about
possible benefits, but with the CS featuring in the SA small print and NC 
small print
the distinction is a lot more grey.

>> because I see it as a
>> "commercially open" license more so than NC.  My understanding of SA is
>> that you (the next in the chain) need to share alike otherwise you need a
>> different license or agreement from me, the author (and other authors 
>> along
>> the chain). If remix my music and you do share alike your remix, there's 
>> no
>> restictions on you making money through ad streams or some other cunning
>> route. Right?  Well that seems like a whole lot more enterprise friendly
>> than an NC release :)  Yet the US & unported SA license contain the 
>> waiver.
>>
>> I would have thought with this in mind for instance, a popular group 
>> might
>> want to experiement with SA, knowning that they'll at least be paid via
>> their CS if their songs become popular enough to gain internet/radio 
>> play.
>
> This is not how BY-SA should work and makes the license non-Free while 
> other
> ports of BY-SA are Free. (At least as I see them now.) This is not a good
> situation. (If I am off my rocker in this read, someone please clear 
> things
> up.

Again, I agree with you by instinct.  However, I thought we might explore
any possible advantage.........urm..........(time passes)  :)

[snip]

Kevin

>
> all the best,
>
> drew
> _______________________________________________
> cc-community mailing list
> cc-community at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
>
> 



More information about the cc-community mailing list