[cc-licenses] Clarification for Non-Derivative License: grayscale from color not a derivative work
g.m.hagedorn at gmail.com
Thu Jan 5 22:42:12 EST 2012
On 5 January 2012 21:11, Sarah Pearson <sarah at creativecommons.org> wrote:
> The way the licenses currently work, the question of what constitutes a
> derivative/adaptation is determined by reference to local law. This is the
> case for purposes of BY-SA and BY-ND. Currently, the only exception is for
> synching, which is explicitly deemed an adaptation for purposes of the
> In other words, the determination of whether colorization (or the reverse)
> is allowed for a BY-ND work has to be answered by reference to applicable
> law. Different jurisdictions have different standards for copyrightability,
> so the answer likely varies depending on where the work is being used.
Which is something probably more general to be addressed for CC 4.0: This
seems to be a completely unworkable assumption of CC.
What is the local law for a publication that involves people from dozens of
countries? On Wikipedia you need to fullfill at least the laws of the
server storage facility, of each country of residence of each editor
involved, and of the primary audience - please correct me if I am wrong. Of
course, anonymity makes it hard to pursue violations, but it becomes more
and more common to sue people based on court orders to reveal the identify
behind IP addresses or user names.
If I, as a German citizen, upload Belgian photographs of the Atomium (no
freedom of panorama and image by necessity made under Belgium legislation),
from a Internet provider in the UK to a U.S. server, addressing audiences
in all German-speaking countries - what is the local law?
Wikipedia tries to stretch as much as possible:
illustrates with a toy-version of the Atomium taken in a public park in
Austria (which, however, is probably a copyright violation in itself...)
shows the Atomium itself, and gives a fair use rationale for the US, but it
is unclear how the uploaded material could ever reach the US without a
copyright violation, given that it is impossible to take the photograph
Summary: I believe Creative Commons needs to overcome as far as possible
the assumption that there is anything like applicable local law.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the cc-licenses