[cc-licenses] Educational Use and NC

Jessica Coates jessica at creativecommons.org
Mon Dec 12 16:22:40 EST 2011


A long-running problemand very articulately expressed

This is definitely a good discussion to raise in the context of 4.0. you
should consider adding something to the blog, if you haven't already:
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0

But for immediate issue - some of the videos are under licences that allow
commercial use. I love
http://creativecommons.org/videos/building-on-the-past and
http://creativecommons.org/videos/mayer-and-bettle


Jessica Coates
Affiliate Network Coordinator
Creative Commons

creativecommons.org
jessica at creativecommons.org

Please donate to the CC Annual Campaign, going on now!
https://creativecommons.net/donate


On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Mike Linksvayer <ml at creativecommons.org>wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Brian W. Carver
> <bcarver at ischool.berkeley.edu> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I teach Copyright law. I am developing an online course for
> > undergraduates to be offered by a university (that charges money for its
> > courses). I thought I could explain some concepts of copyright law by
> > using some Creative Commons videos. I would need to host and distribute
> > the videos in the online course platform. In particular, I thought I
> > might edit down and use part of:
> >
> > http://creativecommons.org/videos/get-creative
> >
> > However, it is licensed under the Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike
> > license, and I assume my use would be a commercial use.
> >
> > So, my options are: negotiate with Creative Commons directly or rely on
> > fair use. (For those not familiar with that video, the irony of not
> > being able to "skip the intermediary" may not be as apparent as I
> > intend. Go watch it.)
>
> I'm not 100% certain negotiating with CC would help -- "Get Creative"
> was produced a long time ago (2002; before my time with CC), lots of
> people contributed ... we'd have to investigate whether we obtained
> all the rights necessary to grant them to you. I've had in the back of
> my mind for a long time to do that so it could be released under a
> non-NC license and/or to produce an updated version of that classic
> and still most useful video. Someone at CC should probably do that.
> :-)
>
> > So then I thought maybe a different video could serve my purposes, so I
> > looked into using:
> >
> > http://creativecommons.org/videos/a-shared-culture
> >
> > But it is also licensed Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike and I
> > still assume my use would be a commercial use.
> >
> > So I figured out that the author, Jesse Dylan, maintains a website at
> > http://wondros.com/contact but after reviewing all those job titles I'm
> > still not sure who I should contact to get permission to use that video.
>
> It would be very, very hard to get permission. The video incorporates
> a track from NIN which is released under BY-NC-SA. Lots of photos
> under BY-NC[-SA] are included from various photographers. Permission
> would have to be obtained from each of them.
>
> I hope that any future assets CC creates are released under non-NC
> licenses. I believe we generally try for CC BY these days, but better
> to start from CC0 in my opinion. No reason for any copyright friction
> in the spread of this information. But that's somewhat off topic of
> 4.0. Irony points granted.
>
> > If Creative Commons videos themselves cannot (easily) be used to educate
> > students about copyright, then something has gone terribly awry. I
> > believe that many authors, not just Creative Commons, would not object
> > to educational uses of their content and select the NonCommercial option
> > only to prevent someone from directly selling the content for profit.
> >
> > Given that, and given Creative Commons' support for Open Educational
> > Resources (OER), I think it is time to mitigate the harm the
> > "NonCommercial" license option does to OER by providing authors with an
> > option to signal that "Educational" uses are excluded from the
> > NonCommercial prohibition.
> >
> > "Educational" would have to be defined carefully so as not to create
> > another term that confuses authors and re-users, but I think it could be
> > done. Probably along the lines of an exception for "...performance or
> > display of a work by instructors or pupils in the course of teaching
> > activities of an educational institution, in a classroom or similar
> > place devoted to instruction or as part of instructional activities
> > transmitted via digital networks..."
> >
> > Faculty developing online courses should not have to try to figure out
> > Section 110 of the Copyright Act (the TEACH Act), which I read to
> > require me to use some sort of DRM that I don't have access to or
> > inclination to use anyway. See the Berkman report that states,
> > "...restrictions so limit the reach of the TEACH Act, and make it so
> > difficult for educators to comply with its requirements, that most
> > observers believe the exception from liability it offers has little or
> > no value." [1]
> >
> > Implementation of an educational uses exception could be handled however
> > CC likes, but I would initially suggest that "permit educational uses?"
> > be a follow-on option to those that select "NonCommercial" leaving us
> > with a plain NC license option and an NC-EDU option. I know that creates
> > some undesirable license proliferation, but I think the educational
> > market is so large and so important so as to justify it. I offer this as
> > a less radical suggestion to eliminating the NC license, something I
> > would also likely support.
> >
> > [1] http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/media/files/copyrightandeducation.html
>
> This was just raised as part of a broader proposal, see
>
> http://blog.tommorris.org/post/14114334627/creative-commons-4-0-proposal-fair-use-baseline
>
> My initial reaction to the educational use part, copied from
> https://plus.google.com/110114902730268262477/posts/PTnqvZHKEBT
>
> "Of the items that you list, I suspect the last (educational use) is
> least feasible. People who want to allow that unambiguously should
> just use a fully open license that permits commercial use. Entities
> that sell copyright licenses for educational uses aren't going to find
> much (any?) "protection" from an NC that effectively permits lots of
> uses they'd consider commercial within their primary market. But there
> are many other things to consider, longer discussion if people want to
> have it. :-)"
>
> Mike
> _______________________________________________
> cc-licenses mailing list
> cc-licenses at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/attachments/20111212/12966713/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the cc-licenses mailing list