[cc-community] CC-like video release form
Matthew J. Agnello
matt.agnello at gmail.com
Tue Jan 15 23:36:01 EST 2008
I definitely don't see it being hard to create a release form like
this or adapt current release forms with a provision for CC. But I
doubt many videographers have ever done this in the past.
It brings up a larger question of whether or not videos can be CC
licensed without violating publicity rights. I don't know if the
protection granted by release forms naturally transfers to derivative
works or not (it seems like no in any country with publicity rights),
and if not, then CC-licensed videos are a lot riskier to remix without
attached documentation. Since seeking permission is one of the things
CC wants to avoid, I think answering this question should be pretty
high on CC's TODO list.
// Matt
----------
Matt Agnello
http://www.hungryfilmmaker.com
< matt.agnello at gmail.com >
On Jan 15, 2008, at 11:40 PM, Terry Hancock wrote:
> Matthew J. Agnello wrote:
>>>> Please bear in mind that unless they consent not only to your
>>>> project,
>>>> but also to any derivatives of your project under the By-SA,
>>>> then your
>>>> choice of the By-SA license is little more than an affectation --
>>>> anyone
>>>> wanting to reuse/remix your end product would need to get separate
>>>> permission from everyone involved in the project.
>>>
>>> Surely not if the release assented to using the released
>>> materials as
>>> per
>>> the license?
>>
>> It's possible to write a release form that releases both the original
>> producer and producers of derivative works from being sued. But it
>> sounds to me, based on Terry's interpretation of the license,
>> unless I
>> have used a specific release form in the creation of my video that
>> accounts for CC derivatives, and that video involves real people at
>> all, I cannot license it BY-SA with the intended effect of allowing
>> people to reuse it, as that re-use would violate publicity rights
>> without first getting permission from the human beings involved in
>> the
>> video.
>>
>> IANAL, and I don't know if this is the correct interpretation, but it
>> does ring true. And, if it is, it might render a lot of CC licensed
>> videos void.
>
> I only wish to say that I'm not a lawyer either, so maybe I'm out
> of my tree, but yes, I think this is probably true. Since the CC
> licenses explicitly deal only in copyright terms and disclaim any
> authority over other kinds of restrictions, I don't think they would
> themselves extend the releases
> at all.
>
> So it would be necessary, IMHO, for the release to provide the same
> kind of extension in order for the license to work as intended. I
> don't
> imagine that would be hard, but I think it's complicated enough to
> warrant writing a standard one for people to reuse (and be reviewed by
> lawyers, I hope).
>
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-community/attachments/20080115/68489e8c/attachment-0001.htm
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-community/attachments/20080115/68489e8c/attachment-0001.bin
More information about the cc-community
mailing list