[cc-licenses] Citing and using selected pictures out of context.
peter.brink at brinkdata.se
Wed Mar 14 18:50:14 EDT 2007
Itai Be'erli skrev:
> Thanks, Peter, for answering my question.
> (1) You wrote: "The licensor grants you the right to copy the work or just
> parts of the work." Where is this written?
See section 3 in the license:
"3. License Grant. Subject to the terms and conditions of this License,
Licensor hereby grants You a worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive,
perpetual (for the duration of the applicable copyright) license to
exercise the rights in the Work as stated below:
1. to Reproduce the Work, to incorporate the Work into one or more
Collections, and to Reproduce the Work as incorporated in the Collections;"
Reproducing and copying is the same thing so this part of the license
grants you the right to copy the work. It does not explicitly state
whether you are allowed to copy just the whole work or parts of it but a
grant to copy a work must be assumed to include the right to copy parts
of it unless the contrary is explicitly stated. Quoting is btw allowed
as exemption to copyright and the license does not affect the rights you
have under law.
> (2) You wrote: "The licensor also grants you the right to adapt his work and
> such adaptations without having to ask for permission." The word "adapt" is
> too vague for me. Is there any list - not necessarily exhaustive, but
> detailed - of examples for the notion "adaptation", as it is supposed to be
> understood by the users of the CC licenses?
The license defines the concept adaptation in section 1:
1. 'Adaptation' means a work based upon the Work, or upon the Work
and other pre-existing works, such as a translation, adaptation,
derivative work, arrangement of music or other alterations of a literary
or artistic work, or phonogram or performance and includes
cinematographic adaptations or any other form in which the Work may be
recast, transformed, or adapted including in any form recognizably
derived from the original, except that a work that constitutes a
Collection will not be considered an Adaptation for the purpose of this
License. For the avoidance of doubt, where the Work is a musical work,
performance or phonogram, the synchronization of the Work in
timed-relation with a moving image ('synching') will be considered an
Adaptation for the purpose of this License."
The term is also defined in the Berne Convention (Article 2) as:
"(3) Translations, adaptations, arrangements of music and other
alterations of a literary or artistic work shall be protected as
original works without prejudice to the copyright in the original work."
The German copyright act defines in article 3 an adaptation as:
"Translations and other adaptations of a work which constitute personal
intellectual creations of the adapter shall enjoy protection as
independent works without prejudice to copyright in the work that has
been adapted. Insignificant adaptations of a non-protected musical work
shall not enjoy protection as independent works."
"Adaptation" is a concept central to copyright law. There is
unfortunately no good online text explaining the concept that I can
point you to, but any decent text book on copyright law covers the
subject. I'm afraid you will need to read up on copyright law if you
really want to understand the consequences of using a open
source/content license. There's really no way around that.
More information about the cc-licenses