[cc-community] CC As One Excuse For Not Extending Copyright Exceptions
drew Roberts
zotz at 100jamz.com
Thu Mar 5 11:31:45 EST 2009
On Thursday 05 March 2009 10:47:14 Mike Linksvayer wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 4:31 AM, drew Roberts <zotz at 100jamz.com> wrote:
> > On Thursday 05 March 2009 06:36:33 Rob Myers wrote:
> >> http://www.out-law.com//default.aspx?page=9838
> >>
> >> 'The [UK] Government suggested that legislators focus more on
> >> improving licensing of material by copyright owners to allow other
> >> people to make works using parts of their content. It said that
> >> companies had already found some success in negotiating such
> >> agreements themselves.
> >>
> >> "In addition to the 'Creative Commons' licence [sic] [...] '
>
> That makes me a little sick.
>
> However, the success of voluntary licensing can and should also be
> used as an argument for broader exceptions -- demand for and utility
> of broader exceptions have been proved, but non default nature imposes
> all kinds of costs even if the voluntary option could be made much
> easier than it is (hard to see how), resulting in a huge social loss
> -- in other words, success of voluntary licensing demonstrates the
> opportunity cost of not having broader exceptions.
>
> > On thing I think legislators should consider is the removal of the
> > compulsory (statutory?) license when the work is offered under a
> > copyleft-Free license such as BY-SA. (BY already removes the need to use
> > such a license, right?)
> >
> > I think this would be a decent balancing of the situation.
>
> Something much more limited but inspired partially by SA provision of
> licenses has been proposed (by an academic anyway) -- if you take
> advantage of exceptions, you have to allow others the same. See
> http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2009/02/making-share-alike-default.html
That is actually in the opposite direction to my thinking but not
incompatible. They both could come into play.
If a person puts a BY-SA (or other copyleft Free) license on a song (lyric &
melody) you cannot make use of a compulsory license for a cover, you must use
the BY-SA license instead.
If you invoke a compulsory license on a non-Free song and make a cover, you
must allow others to license your resulting work in a similar manner? (Hmmm,
all your work, or just the compulsory licensed derivative? I wonder which
makes sense.)
>
> Mike
drew
More information about the cc-community
mailing list