[cc-community] NC/ND

drew Roberts zotz at 100jamz.com
Tue Dec 20 08:18:27 EST 2011


On Monday 19 December 2011 23:33:16 Anthony wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 7:06 PM, Mike Linksvayer <ml at creativecommons.org> 
wrote:
> > * BY-NC-ND is clearly most problematic in terms of usefully
> > contributing to a commons
>
> What's the difference between BY-NC and BY-NC-ND?  You can use BY-NC
> in a completely proprietary (ARR) work.  So far as I can tell, you
> *cannot* use it in a BY-SA work (because if you did, that work would
> no longer be BY-SA). 

You would think that wouldn't you. I used to. But we have a famous case of a 
BY-SA film incorporating ARR music. (SSTB) So it would seem that you can 
incorporate non-Free stuff in BY-SA licensed works.

Perhaps this needs to be "fixed" in the next version so that this cannot 
happen anymore. With jail terms, huge fines, and loss of net access all in 
the picture for offenders, why should we make this dangerous for everyday 
people. Or at least so that it must be ***CLEARLY*** indicated if a BY-SA 
work contains any non-Free materials. And if the latter so that this work 
cannot incorporate other copyright holders' BY-SA works.

Just this week I ran into a case where a friend released a song as BY-SA but 
the underlying music and lyrics (pdf) indicate that they are ARR, this where 
the site says you need to have the rights to upload with a particular license 
and that you license uploads with that license but the friend did the upload 
with the copyright holders permission but the copyright holder himself did 
not do the upload.

This seems like a trap waiting to catch the unsuspecting no matter how well 
intentioned the current players are. As I have just read this morning, who 
knows what our heirs will do with our copyrights?

all the best,

drew



More information about the cc-community mailing list