[cc-licenses] Disclaimers for works of opinion as an incentive to free licensing
rob at robmyers.org
Sat May 5 11:31:00 EDT 2012
On 05/03/2012 10:50 AM, Gisle Hannemyr wrote:
> On 02.05.2012 14:08, Christopher Covington wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 14:03:53 +0200 Gisle Hannemyr wrote:
>>> (Some tells me that the USA is different,
>>> but to me, it looks as if moral rights is alive and well,
>>> even in the USA, re:
>> My understanding of that case is that after the judge rejected the fair
>> use defense, the two parties settled with each other. The court did not
>> make any ruling upholding moral rights as such.
> This is not correct. Some other disputes about the GOP-campaign
> using songs by "Disgruntled Rockers" were resolved by the GOP
> licensing the songs (this was how a similar conflict with Foo
> Fighters was resolved). However, in the case of Jackson Browne,
> Browne's moral rights means that the GOP cannot legally use his
> songs, even if they buy a license).
My favorite example of Moral Rights being upheld in the US is the Monty
> If the CC puts a too broad waiver of moral rights into its license,
> it will just make this part of the license (and possibly the whole
> license) illegal in any jurisdiction that is a Berne signatory,
> *including* the USA.
Moral rights are waivable in some jurisdictions (e.g. the UK), but are
inalienable in others (e.g. Germany).
More information about the cc-licenses