Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: [cc-licenses] Licence Upgrades

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Harlan Lieberman-Berg <sysadmin AT tacticalbusinesspartners.com>
  • To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] Licence Upgrades
  • Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 19:15:24 -0500

Well, I am not a lawyer as well, but I believe that the language which
you have quoted would explicitly DENY the rights to upgrade. After all,
it does say (e.g. Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Japan)." Which includes the
version number...

Harlan Lieberman-Berg

On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 07:30 +0900, wiki_tomos wrote:
> Terry might have something else in mind, but I can think of the
> language in CC-*-SA 2.0 and 2.5 (not 1.0)
>
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/legalcode
>
> "4. Restrictions.The license granted in Section 3 above is
> expressly made subject to and limited by the following restrictions:"
>
> "b. You may distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or
> publicly digitally perform a Derivative Work only under the terms
> of this License, a later version of this License with the same License
> Elements as this License, or a Creative Commons iCommons license that
> contains the same License Elements as this License
> (e.g. Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Japan)."
>
> This language, according to many on this list, means that when you
> create a Derivative Work, you may choose to upgrade the license to a
> later version.
>
> Please note, that they are not lawyers as I understand, their opinions not
> legal advice, nor are they speaking to represent official opinion of
> the Creative Commons.
>
> Non-SA licenses do not have this type of language, as I remember.
> SA 1.0 licenses do not have it, either.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Tomos
>
> Jonathon Blake wrote:
>
> >Terry wrote:
> >
> >> Yes -- unlike the GPL, the CC licenses carry this language *in* the
> >> license.
> >
> >What wording in that licence allows either the work, or a derivative
> >to have a "licence upgrade"?
> >
> >I didn't find anything, when I was examining the text, that implied that.
> >
> >xan
> >
> >jonathon
> _______________________________________________
> cc-licenses mailing list
> cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
>




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page