Creative Commons - Belgium

[Hannelore Dekeyser <hannelore.dekeyser AT law.kuleuven.ac.be>]

Hi all,

I'm splitting my replies in different posts, because these are very
different discussions.

See comments inserted.

Alexandre Dulaunoy wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Hannelore Dekeyser wrote:
>
>
> > Alexandre Dulaunoy wrote:
> >
> > > Hi All,
> > [...]
> >
> > > 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.
> >
> > In my opinion, Commercial of Non-Commercial, Derivatives or
> > No-Derivatives, Share-Alike or Freeride is pretty clear.
>
>
> I don't think so.  e.g. : Non-Commercial/Non-Derivative is clearly the
> old concept of proprietary shareware with a new terminology. But a lot
> of    people    are    using    NC   without    seeing    the    clear
> implication. Non-Commercial distribution is a fuzzy concept.


I'm not convinced the terms 'proprietory', 'shareware' or 'freeware' are
any more clear.  Each author can write his own licence.  The labels
'shareware' and 'freeware' are applied by third parties (for instance
site editors that link to the software), these are categories with fuzzy
boundaries as well.
The advantage of the CCPL is that the terms
Non-Commercial/Non-Derivative etc have a well-defined meaning.  The
definition is the same for all works under this licence.

Is Internet Explorer freeware? or shareware? You could probably argument
both ways.

Can you give an example of confusion caused by the terms
Non-Commercial/Non Derivative?
Do you mean: "Is use by a non-profit organisation commercial use?"

This is a valid question, but you could ask the same question in case
the work is freeware or shareware.


> > > 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).

In this respect, the licence is also intended to simplify life for users
of the work.  Can I reuse it or not? Under which conditions?

Hannelore
--
Hannelore Dekeyser
Interdisciplinary Centre for Law and Information Technology
Website: http://www.law.kuleuven.ac.be/icri