Probable errors in CC licenses
ml at creativecommons.org
Tue Aug 19 15:38:52 EDT 2003
On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 02:50:17 +0200, "Lorenzo De Tomasi"
<lorenzo.detomasi at libero.it> said:
> If I read the names 'Attribution' and 'Attribution-NoDerivs', it seems to
> that 'Attribution' permits derived copies and that 'Attribution-NoDerivs'
> doesn't permits derived copies.
> But if you read the description it seems that 'Attribution' doesn't
> derived copies ("The licensor permits others to copy, distribute,
> and perform the work.") -> It doesn't talk about modify/derive; so it
> that 'Attribution' and 'Attribution-NoDerivs' are the same license and so
> why are they 2 and not one?
They aren't the same license. Attribution explicitly grants rights to
create derivative works. See
<http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/legalcode>. This right isn't
called out in the commons deed
<http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/>, which may be the source of
your confusion. We are planning to make this clear in a commons deed
revision. However, the licenses themselves (the legalcode) are A-OK on
this count, to my non-lawyerly eyes anyhow.
More information about the cc-licenses