[cc-licenses] Trademark attribution loophole?

Diane Peters diane at creativecommons.org
Mon Sep 30 17:33:45 EDT 2013


Hi everyone,

Thanks for calling this to our attention, Kent.

I agree with James generally that truthful use of a logo to correctly
identify the source should not be considered an infringing use,
particularly where the owner supplies it with the work.   Notwithstanding,
having reviewed this thread and a parallel thread on the open definition
list, we think it best to remove the reference to trademark from the
attribution provision in Section 3(a)(1)(A).  While licensors may still
choose to do so just as some already do under 3.0, its removal should
reduce confusion over the scope of the license (as limited in Section
2(b)).[FN1]

Thus, the attribution provision would read:

"identify the creator(s) of the Licensed Material and others designated to
receive attribution, in any reasonable manner requested by the Licensor
(including by pseudonym if designated)"

We'll be updating the html in the next day, and this change will be made
across all six licenses.

Thanks!
Diane

FN1:  CC has FAQs<http://wiki.creativecommons.org/FAQ#Could_I_use_a_CC_license_to_share_my_logo_or_trademark.3F>
on
the topic of using CC licenses for sharing trademarks and the implied
license point that Kent raises.


On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 5:15 PM, Rob Myers <rob at robmyers.org> wrote:

> On 14/09/13 03:14 PM, James Grimmelmann wrote:
> > But to avoid doubt, it would be better
> > either:
> >
> > * to modify 2(b)(2) to say that trademark rights are licensed to the
> > extent needed to comply with an identification requirement, or
> > * to modify 3(a)(1)(A)(i) to say that the identification condition is
> > waived if "the manner requested by the Licensor" would impose legal
> > liability or additional legal obligations on the licensee.
>
> The former would be better as it would ensure the fewest surprises for
> users.
>
> But I think the latter should be used, as it will ensure the fewest
> surprises for trademark holders of the "waah! Creative Commons stole my
> trademarks!" kind.
>
> _______________________________________________
> List info and archives at
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
> Unsubscribe at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/cc-licenses
>
> In consideration of people subscribed to this list to participate
> in the CC licenses http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0 development
> process, please direct unrelated discussions to the cc-community list
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
>



-- 
Diane M. Peters, CC General Counsel
http://creativecommons.org/staff#dianepeters
diane at creativecommons.org <email%3Adiane at creativecommons.org>


______________________________________

Please note: the contents of this email are not intended to be legal
advice nor should they be relied upon as, or represented to be legal
advice.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/attachments/20130930/9616e62e/attachment.html 


More information about the cc-licenses mailing list