[cc-community] Ask for help: I agreed to a license by mistake

Terry Hancock hancock at anansispaceworks.com
Thu Feb 21 19:59:26 EST 2008


Cesare Marilungo wrote:
> I'm not saying that the people at Opsound are doing this to trick people 
> into choosing a license unintentionally.

My reference to fraud wasn't directed at Opsound. It's just that if
intent were not a requirement for licensing, then there's lots of ways
that a (hypothetical) hosting company could defraud contributors.

> It was clear to me that the page
> simply linked to the mp3s hosted on my server.

I suspect that a *listing* service is probably distinct from a *hosting*
service. Since Opsound never actually *had* your file, they can't
*release* it under the CC-By-SA license. They can only claim (falsely)
that *you* have released it under that license.

That would, of course, put you in breach of contract with them for
misrepresenting your license -- they'd be entirely within their rights
to deny you further services because of this incident.

But you did this unintentionally, and you have taken steps to rectify
the error. Which, IMHO, clears you of that obligation (it would be
different if you were actively trying to fool them in order to get more
exposure).

One question I do have -- did you mark the works with your By-NC-ND
license (for example, in the MP3's ID3 metadata)? Such a notice should
be adequate for downloaders, regardless of what they may have read on
the Opsound site.

(I should probably reiterate at this point that I am NOT a lawyer, just
an interested observer).

I should like to point out that, like Drew, I am primarily interested in
 CC-By-SA or CC-By music (as source material). For me, NC-ND work isn't
really all that different from ARR (under fair use, much of what NC-ND
allows is already legal).

However, a situation like the one you describe is a panic situation for
me if I've used your work in, say, a GPL-licensed game software, because
suddenly, you've rendered my work non-free, and now *I'm* making
promises I can't deliver on. In such a situation, I have to immediately
pull the work, replace the track with something appropriately licensed,
and inform all downstream users of the track that the work I promised
them was legal and free-licensed is actually *neither*. Which is a
serious slap-in-the-face to *my* reputation, not just yours.

When a license is misrepresented or changed like this, it may harm
hundreds (or even millions for a popular package) of people you've never
even met. It's very important for the benefit of the community to
establish that a work was in fact licensed under a given license, and
not to be able to revoke it after the fact.

Cheers,
Terry

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



More information about the cc-community mailing list