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

Kevin Phillips (home) tacet at qmpublishing.com
Wed Aug 20 18:12:50 EDT 2008


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Terry Hancock" <hancock at anansispaceworks.com>
To: <cc-community at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 7:41 PM
Subject: Re: [cc-community] BY-SA license in the UK has 
non-waiveredcollection society fees?


> jonathon wrote:
>> [...]
>> I would not have considered the possibility that the clause was
>> accidentally included.
>
> Well, obviously I did consider it (since I mentioned it) based purely on
> reading this license, but it seemed pretty unlikely. OTOH, so do typos
> on store signage, but it still happens (I could never understand that --
> you pay hundreds of dollars for your slogan in meter-high letters, but
> you don't spell-check it?!).

Well I still think it's an industry conspiracy, hehe ;)

> I figured it was more likely that somebody was trying to be extremely
> clever, and I just wasn't getting it.
>
> Anyway, I can't see that there is any use in recriminations over making
> such an error or letting it go uncorrected for so long -- all that can
> be done at this point is to fix it in the next version. So, kudos to
> those who are doing that, instead.

I'm not so interested in recriminations either, but.....

> It does make me wonder though -- if someone used CC By-SA 2.0/UK on
> their work (presumably based on the deed), then which license applies:
> the actual one we've been reading, or the "intended" license with
> section 2.5 struck? IOW: "what they meant" or "what they wrote"?

Exactly....and what of the folks who have used the license and have been
remixed by others....and what of the collection society fees which 
presumably
have been paid in accordance with this license?

I'm not interested in whos fault, but I am interested in the fall out.

I'm really glad I looked at that license, I had been considering using it 
for
some new things I'm working on, assuming it would be "better" to use a
license from my current jurisdiction rather than using the unported SA.

How wrong could I be?  ....and how glad am I that I've got 10 mixes
all half finished lol :)

> I suppose that really is lawyer-bait, and we'll probably never know.

Hmm, what are the options for CC though?   They can't presumably pull
the license, they can't change it or make a 2.1 rc1 ;)

Maybe there should be a *notice* applied to the UK 2.0 deed though, warning
of the error and potential issues with incompatibility, no?

> OTOH, I am extremely relieved to hear that this clause wasn't supposed
> to be there.

Me too.  Thanks Terry (and everyone else) for the input on this, 
particularly
Prodromos for clearing it up.

My new stuff should be ready in time for the 3.0 license, lol :)

Kev

> Cheers,
> Terry
>
> -- 
> Terry Hancock (hancock at AnansiSpaceworks.com)
> Anansi Spaceworks http://www.AnansiSpaceworks.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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