Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-be - [Cc-be] Very quick comments on CCs-[BE] and playground for other discussions.

cc-be AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Creative Commons - Belgium

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Alexandre Dulaunoy <alexandre.dulaunoy AT ael.be>
  • To: cc-be AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [Cc-be] Very quick comments on CCs-[BE] and playground for other discussions.
  • Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 18:59:29 +0100 (CET)

Hi All,

Here is my 'quick' comments on the CCs and the effort of adaptation in
Belgium. A large part of the comments is regarding the CCs on a global
scale but some points [BE prefix] are related to the local/national
adaptation.

[rev. 0.0.1]

* Disclaimer

Only the "free" perspective and the collaborative framework
creator/works is taken in consideration.

* Introduction or do I understand the CCs ?

First of all, I want to be sure that I understood the CCs and the
coverage of CCs. The CCs coverage is primarily the non-functional
works[1] therefore functional works are normally covered by other
licenses. Functional works are software, "computer programs",
functional documentation[2] or works having an integrated part of
another functional works.

But digital society is evolving to more and more functional works, a
lot of non-functional work can become functional by the need to make
(for example) derivative works. Its easier to make derivative works
when you have the initial "source" of the works. This is not the scope
of the comments.

CCs is a framework proposed to authors/creators to pick various
licenses by granting or revoking certains of their rights. It's
difficult to find exactly which licences can be considered as free[3]
as a large part is clearly non-free[4] but proposes a clarification of
old classical approach (e.g. : No Derivative and/or No Commercial is a
clarification of the old proprietary concept "Shareware").

[BE/Global] CCs should use a clear terminology when using
"free"/libre/vrij terms. Are the proposed licenses free or not ? an
update to the existing could be a good way.

CCs are here to simplify the work of the authors/creators to choose a
"license" without too much legal complexity and to limit the number of
works with no exclusive rights open (default rule of copyrights).

If you feel I misunderstand something, please let me know.

* My comments on the belgian transposition :

(Scope : Compatibilities or can I exchange work with CCs world and/or
the other communities ? DRM clause issue ? 2001/29/CE still not
transposed in Belgium but why using terminology from it ? Moral rights
and patrimonial rights in CCs ?)

[Note: in this case, 'use' is using the original work in another new
original work]

[BE] Are the BE adaptation of the CCs licenses are all compatible with
the other respective adaptation ? Can I use a content licensed under
the CC-SA-1.0(en) in my work licensed work with a CC-SA-2.0(be-fr) ?
In the case of CC-NC, a author in US wants to use my work licensed
under a CC-NC-SA-2.0(be-nl) but the belgian translation removed the
lending rights ? How can I proceed with this issue without contacting
the author ? and by contacting the author ? Can you show us a
practical example ?

[BE/Global] Are the BE adaption compatible the other CCs ? is there
a compatibility matrix available somewhere with all the CCs licences ?

[BE] Moral rights and use of DRM/TPMs. How can you ensure the scope of
the moral rights exercice to format only ? It wouldn't be better to
exclude fully moral rights on the various licences ? or to force the
scope on the 'patrimonial' side only ?

[BE/EU] Regarding the implementation of the 2001/29/CE, the "copyright
management information" of the article 7 is closely linked to the
article 6 of the 2001/29/CE. I'm really afraid that could be used to
clearly revoke the 4a stating the opposite. Why do you want to use
this terminology as the transposition is not done in Belgium ? Why not
keeping "copyright notice" ?

[BE] Can you explain the 8e modification ?

[BE] Is all the exceptions in Section 5 (Exceptions aux droits) from
"loi du 30 juin 1994" (from Art. 21 to Art. 24) in the licences
practicable ?

A quick feedback, feel free to comment (I open to discuss all aspects),

Thanks a lot for your work,

Kind regards,

adulau

PS : Do you plan to make a transposition of others CCs initiative like
the public domain certification. Can we imagine to make a similar
certification in the european region and in Belgium ? This would be
great to add more free works inside the free digital community.


[1] http://creativecommons.org/faq#faq_entry_3646
[2] http://creativecommons.org/faq#faq_entry_3647
[3] There is no clear definition of "free" for non-functional digital
works. Free concepts are in the functional world :

http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
http://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines
http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php

[4] http://people.debian.org/~evan/ccsummary.html


--
** Alexandre Dulaunoy (adulau) **** http://www.foo.be/ **** 0x44E6CBCD
**/ "To disable the Internet to save EMI and Disney is the moral
**/ equivalent of burning down the library of Alexandria to ensure the
**/ livelihood of monastic scribes." Jon Ippolito.




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page