[cc-community] Are translated versions of CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 España different licenses?

Nathan Kinkade nkinkade at creativecommons.org
Wed Dec 14 15:31:05 EST 2011


On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 15:03, jonathon <jonathon.blake at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 14/12/11 19:23, Nathan Kinkade wrote:
>
>> Similarly, removing /legalcode.ca doesn't change which license the work is under, notwithstanding any typos in that
>  translation of that particular legalcode.
>
> Typos can, and do affect the meaning, and thus both the apparent intent,
> and effect of the license.
>
> Do you really want to argue with a copyright holder that your sale of
> CC-BY-SA content is not a license violation, because the unported
> license permits the resale of content, even though the ported license
> that was used for the license specifically prohibits the resale of the
> content? I doubt that any competent judge will buy the argument that the
> "no resale allowed" clause in the CC-BY-SA (ported) license is merely a
> typo to be overlooked.
>
> I realize that the specific example here is CC-BY-NC-ND, but unless one
> has specifically studied both the CC-BY-NC-ND (ported) and the
> CC-BY-NC-ND (unported) version, and can legally demonstrate that the two
> are identical in scope, meaning, intent, and effect, then assuming that
> the two are congruent, is an assumption that will backfire upon one.
>
> jonathon

Nope. I'm not arguing anything, but simply pointing out that, as an
example, the following two URLs indicate the same license, which I
believe was the nature of the original poster's question:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/gt/
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/gt/legalcode

Nathan


More information about the cc-community mailing list