[cc-licenses] CC0 beta/discussion draft 2
zotz at 100jamz.com
Fri Apr 18 20:26:36 EDT 2008
On Friday 18 April 2008 18:23:52 John Hendrik Weitzmann wrote:
> I can confirm for Germany basically all Gisle said for Norway.
> Something I just posted on the cc-europe list:
> The only possible solution under monistic systems with strong moral
> rights would probably be an assertion to never claim and enforce any
> unwaivable right in the work. But courts won't be readily willing to
> uphold such an auxilliary construction designed to circumvene
> non-dispositive law.
Well, one perhaps nasty way to partially counteract this would be to put in
the license part where it is revoked should moral rights be asserted on
follow on works.
So, if you build on a work from a place that has no moral rights or allows
them to be waived, then, should you assert your moral rights on a follow on
work, you would lose the rights granted to you on the original work... Would
the courts take kindly to such a play? It just doesn't seem to be a good way
to approach things in any case. I think we need to be fostering cooperation
and this seems like it could be counter productive, even if it may work...
all the best,
> And (bad for Larry) we might have to get into the messiness of
> contractual relations again, as with the licenses. Or rely on bona fide,
> which is even worse.
> @Mike: Can CC0 as a construct live with "worth a try (but might turn out
> not to work)"?
> all the best,
> Gisle Hannemyr schrieb:
> > Mike Linksvayer wrote:
> >> See http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/8211 for announcement,
> >> feedback encouraged on this list.
> >> - CC0 waiver legalcode
> >> http://labs.creativecommons.org/licenses/zero/1.0/legalcode
> > I do not think that the text of the beta CC0 waiver will have any
> > legal effect in most countries in Europe. I am certain that this
> > will not fly in Norway.
> > You just can't waive moral rights in Norway (the law is very clear
> > on that point). But that's a mere technicality. Even if you
> > can't waive moral rights, if you think you can, you will probably
> > not create too much of a stink when someone violates them.
> > But in the legal code, the author waives a lot of other rights:
> > "privacy rights, rights protecting against unfair competition
> > and any rights protecting the extraction, dissemination and reuse
> > of data" without as much as pausing to establish that the author
> > has those rights in the first place.
> > Take a photograph for instance. In Norway a photograph depicting
> > a person is considered personal data and covered by the data
> > protection act. The privacy rights attached to that data
> > belongs to the depicted person, not the author. This goes for
> > a number of other data as well. You simply can't release
> > personal data into the public domain in Norway, so making the
> > waiver apply to data bases open up a whole can of worms as to
> > who controls the right to the data in the data base (in many
> > cases, it is not the author).
> > I am afraid that releasing something like this on the general
> > public is not a good idea. People using CC-licenses are not
> > legal experts and the CC0 legalcode has the potential to
> > create a huge mess if someone without the legal expertise
> > starts using it to waive rights that they he not posess in
> > the first place.
> cc-licenses mailing list
> cc-licenses at lists.ibiblio.org
More information about the cc-licenses