Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: [cc-licenses] input requested: FAL/BY-SA compatibility - attribution

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Engel Nyst <engel.nyst AT gmail.com>
  • To: cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] input requested: FAL/BY-SA compatibility - attribution
  • Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2014 19:27:08 -0400

On 08/04/2014 11:53 AM, Sarah Pearson wrote:
On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 3:49 PM, Engel Nyst<engel.nyst AT gmail.com>
wrote:

Does this provision "survive" the licensing of an adaptation under
FAL?


No, because of section 2(a)(5)(B) of BY-SA 4.0, which says:

"Every recipient of Adapted Material from You automatically receives
an offer from the Licensor to exercise the Licensed Rights in the
Adapted Material under the conditions of the Adapter’s License You
apply."

Thank you, I missed that! I don't know how I missed it. This is important.

The original work is relicensed (additionally licensed), and the
consequence is losing any CC-BY-SA 4.0 specifics, such as attribution
removal option.

On 08/04/2014 12:05 PM, Melanie Dulong de Rosnay wrote:
No, but applicable French droit d'auteur right of attribution has a
downside right to anonymity, so the same result could probably be
achieved...

I haven't suggested or supported the use of moral rights in sensitive
contexts, because I see a striking difference between the attribution
removal provision and moral rights in some European jurisdictions: the
first offers the author a way to dissociate their name from the work,
while the second is interpreted as power to withdraw from circulation
works the author doesn't agree with.

On 08/04/2014 11:53 AM, Sarah Pearson wrote:
When someone applies the FAL to an adaptation of a BY-SA work,
technically both the FAL and BY-SA apply to the full adaptation
because both the adapter and the original author have rights in the
work.

I wonder if this is true and remains true for the reverse case. Reading
the FAL, I see that when someone applies the CC-BY-SA 4.0 to an
adaptation of a FAL work, assuming FAL steward will accept CC-BY-SA 4.0
as "compatible", then the FAL original material is not relicensed
(additionally licensed) under CC-BY-SA 4.0.

The subsequent work is governed by the compatible license, per 2.3, 4,
5, where subsequent work means the adapter's copyrighted contributions.

In this case, the adaptation license has to be interpreted as both FAL
and CC-BY-SA 4.0, each for the respective material. Is this a correct
interpretation?

--
"Excuse me, Professor Lessig, may I ask you to sign this CLA, so we can
*legally* have your permission to distribute your CC-licensed works?"




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page