[cc-licenses] different license for different bitrate
Mia Garlick
mia at creativecommons.org
Thu Dec 14 08:39:03 EST 2006
heya, first up - i don't read the original posting as asking that. i
read the original posting as asking whether you can have one version
of the work under a CC license and a version of the work in a
different format under an ARR copyright.
secondly, in your hypo, i think the answer is no. just because
someone has offered something under one set of license terms (license
A, let's say) and then another (license B), doesn't give licensee A
the authority to switch to license B. however, as a practical matter
this question may be moot because if licensee B became aware of the
less restrictively licensed work then they could go and take a copy
under that license and so become a licensee under that license.
On Dec 14, 2006, at 5:30 AM, drew Roberts wrote:
> On Thursday 14 December 2006 07:57 am, Mia Garlick wrote:
>> actually, i disagree....see e.g., clause 7(b) (referring to the BY
>> license for ease of reference) confirms that: "Notwithstanding the
>> above, Licensor reserves the right to release the Work under
>> different license terms..."
>>
>> the license is non-exclusive, thus it is perfectly acceptable for a
>> licensor to offer one version under a CC license and one under
>> separate licensing terms.
>
> I am happy to hear you disagree, so just to be sure we are on the
> same page
> Mia, here is what I was trying to do:
>
> http://www.ourmedia.org/node/42417
> http://www.ourmedia.org/user/17145
> http://www.lulu.com/zotz
>
> So, are you saying that if I release a photo at 640X480 under BY-SA
> and
> 800X600 BY-NC-ND, a person could not take the 800X600 and apply the
> BY-SA
> license to it as they have such a license for "the work"???
>
> I know I can give out different licenses, the question is can a
> person "move
> licenses" to other versions that they have of the same work? I hope
> that it
> is clear what I am asking.
>
> all the best,
>
> drew
>>
>> On Dec 14, 2006, at 4:14 AM, drew Roberts wrote:
>>> On Thursday 14 December 2006 02:55 am, Amit Yadav wrote:
>>>> hi all,
>>>> i wanted to know if it is possible to have a song file at say 128
>>>> kbps
>>>> under CC license and have another file (of the same song) at say
>>>> 256kbps under Copyright (the usual "all rights reserved" one) when
>>>> both files are of the same recording….. ??
>>>
>>> I would like it if that were possible, I was trying the same thing
>>> with
>>> pictures, I was told no. It is the "work" that is licenses, not an
>>> instance
>>> of the work.
>>>
>>> I would still appreciate a better explanation of why it must be
>>> this way.
>>>
>>>> thanks
>>>> Amit
>>>
>>> all the best,
>>>
>>> drew
>>> --
>>> (da idea man)
>>> National Novel Writing Month
>>> Sayings (Winner 2006)
>>> http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> cc-licenses mailing list
>>> cc-licenses at lists.ibiblio.org
>>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cc-licenses mailing list
>> cc-licenses at lists.ibiblio.org
>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
>
> --
> (da idea man)
> National Novel Writing Month
> Sayings (Winner 2006)
> http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
> _______________________________________________
> cc-licenses mailing list
> cc-licenses at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
More information about the cc-licenses
mailing list