[cc-community] No Hard Copy Distribution Condition (Let's discuss)
drew Roberts
zotz at 100jamz.com
Tue Feb 12 16:09:02 EST 2008
On Tuesday 12 February 2008 15:46:23 Ocetalo wrote:
> Hi Andrew. I'm talking about things I don't really know, but I'll try:
>
> *Author's must have control over the fate of their works.
>
> >> they must? Why do you say that?
>
> *
> Let's say you're a jew graphic artist (sorry I find no more accurate
> example now) proud to be a jew. You license one picture under CC BY-NC.
> Many people can get it, including some neo-nazi men. They misuse it. Who
> cares? They're only individuals. Now, "Blood Dignity", a neo-nazi-oriented
> organization, gets, prints and uses your picture for the cover of a
> non-profit publication intended to support ideas which are against your
> principles and insulting to jews. What stops them from? CC BY-NC allows
> them to, without having to ask your permission. They *don't even have to
> notify* you, so they do it literally behind your back and it is OK! Some
> weeks or months later you notice it, but it's too late. Your reputation is
> already damaged. You appear linked to an organization you would never be
> involved with.
Yes and no. Say for instance you had used BY-SA instead of BY-NC... You can
instead point out the license you used and how you are willing to TAKE A RISK
to your reputation and finances in order to promote FREEDOM for the people of
the world and how some people choose to MISUSE that freedom but that once you
grant the freedom, the uses the work is put to cannot be laid at your door.
Just like we should not be blaming the government for the things said as a
result of freedom of speach laws.
Perhaps, with the old licensing mentality, that linking of the author to the
misuse of the work was warranted. With the granting of Free licenses, I don't
think it is.
So, with BY-NC, I would not want to say, but with BY or BY-SA, I think the
freedom granted is a reasonable defence to those who would link the creator
to the misuse. It may take some time for this new mentality to filter through
society though.
> And what do you think the opinion of many jews will be? I
> know it's a poor example but it gives some idea on my concerns.
Personally, I am more concerned with my recorded voice and my photographic and
videographic images and those of my wife and child. Much more so than my
words.
Taking words out of context has been so easy to do for so long it is not
funny. We don't need to be listening only to quotes from people's opponents.
(I know this can be tough.)
>
> * Literary works are more vulnerable to distortion than other kind of
> works,
??? Can you explain why? Well, they may be, but why, with proper Free licenses
and a proper understanding of what can be done with the same, should this
negatively impact the creator?
>
> > *
>
> *
>
> >> Why do you claim that? *
>
> Because authors of literary works (I mean not only stories, but also
> articles, essays...) are expected to be more involved with opinions
> expressed in their writings thus more responsible for them. Written stuff
> is always supposed to reflect the author's way of thinking more accurately,
> so it's more likely to be taken seriously.
Perhaps for stuff intended to be given more weight, but written stuff on the
net today is more akin to casual conversation at times than to considered
essays.
>
> * and also can bring more harm in case of misuse by organizations. *
I am not sure I get this bit. If it can cause more harm, is it not the fault
of the receivers and the organizational misusers and not the fault of the
author?
all the best,
drew
>
> *
>
> >> Could you give us an example *
>
> There are lots! A few here:
> http://www.caslon.com.au/mrcasesnote.htm
> http://www.rbs2.com/copyr.htm
> http://www.rbs2.com/moral.htm#anchor222222
> http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/property00/jurisdiction/Giganteedit.html
> Something like this case is what I'm concerned about: *
> Shostakovich v. 20th Century-Fox (*lost in US) or *Soc. Le Chant de Monde
> v. **20th Century-Fox* (won in France)
>
> The other questions I left them open until I figure out how to answer.
>
> On Feb 12, 2008 5:23 AM, Andrew Rens <andrewrens at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Author's must have control over the fate of their works.
> > >
> > >> they must? Why do you say that?
> >
> > Literary works are more vulnerable to distortion than other kind of
> > works,
> >
> > >> Why do you claim that?
> >
> > and also can bring more harm in case of misuse by *organizations*.
> >
> > >> Could you give us an example
> >
> > By full copyright a previous agreement is needed prior to publishing, so
> >
> > > the author has a chance to prevent potential misuse by organizations.
> > >
> > >> Authors who cede their copyrights i.e. almost all authors who deal
> > >> with
> >
> > the commercial publishing industry do not retain a right to give
> > "previous" agreement before works are published. Publishers have a right
> > to restrict copying whether digital of print, subject to exceptions and
> > limitations.
> >
> > How does CC prevents misuse and violation of moral rights by publishing
> >
> > > and distribution? Or maybe it's not a CC task?
> >
> > What do you mean by prevent?
> >
> > On Feb 9, 2008 9:42 AM, Rob Myers <rob at robmyers.org> wrote:
> > > > jonathon wrote:
> > > > > Eric wrote:
> > > > >> Copyright has never given you (the author) the right to control
> > > >
> > > > such usage.
> > > >
> > > > > Moral Rights: An aspect of copyright that was unknown in the US,
> > > > > until Ted Turner decided to colourize some Black and White movies.
> > > >
> > > > I don't think this can restrict distribution and consumption of
> > > > actual copies of the books, though. So it cannot control where the
> > > > books are sold, who to, and what the purchasers then do with the
> > > > knowledge they get from them.
> > > >
> > > > It could conceivably restrict anthologization of a CC-licenced work.
> > > >
> > > > (IANAL)
> > > >
> > > > - Rob.
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > cc-community mailing list
> > > > cc-community at lists.ibiblio.org
> > > > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > cc-community mailing list
> > > cc-community at lists.ibiblio.org
> > > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
> >
> > --
> > Andrew Rens
> > Now blogging at www.aliquidnovi.org
> > _______________________________________________
> > cc-community mailing list
> > cc-community at lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
>
> !DSPAM:47b20685227461222944467!
More information about the cc-community
mailing list