[cc-licenses] CC:BY ... lost in translation?

Michael Tiemann tiemann at redhat.com
Tue Nov 14 08:27:58 EST 2006


On Tue, 2006-11-14 at 10:06 +0100, Pascal Muller wrote:
> On 11/13/06, Michael Tiemann <tiemann at redhat.com> wrote:
>         The text of the CC:BY 2.5 license deed (simplified text) says:
>         
>                 Attribution. You must attribute the work in the manner
>         specified
>                 by the author or licensor.
>         
>                 [ From http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ ]
>         
>         This is much more broad than what the underlying legal code
>         actually
>         says, permits, or requires.  For example: say I'm the CEO of
>         FUBAR Inc.
>         I offer a software package under CC:BY, and the manner of
>         attribution I 
>         specify is "whenever you use this software, you must wear a
>         FUBAR T-
>         shirt over your regular shirt.
> 
> That's not true. It says that work  based on the work licensed under
> CC:BY needs to be credited/attributed to the original creator. 
> 
> I guess your example doesn't fit into that, because you can't force
> someone to do something while using the work, but only if someone
> makes a derivative version. 

Where is the legally narrow definition of what constitutes proper
attribution so that it is something less than an arbitrary act specified
by the author or licensor?  Moreover, if attribution is somehow limited
in scope for the original work, but can take on onerous dimensions in
the case of making a derivative work, that onerousness militates against
the freedoms one would expect from a grant that does not expressly
forbid commercial use or the creation of derived works.

You have stated what I want to believe, but you have not proved the
point that would convince me.

M





More information about the cc-licenses mailing list