Cc-europe mailing list

[Gruber Lukás <Lukas.Gruber AT nkp.cz>]

Title: RE: [CC-Europe] Europeana and CC0

Dear Pro,

I will try to contribute to the discussion about CC zero not working in specific jurisdiction. We havent translated or even promoted cc zero in czech republic for the reason that the purpose of cc zero inteferes with czech copyright. Waiving all economic rights and some of moral rights is not possible within czech jurisdiction. The farest extent how an author can waive his rights is actually embodied in CC-BY. That´s the most "liberal" licence you can use with accordance of czech copyright.

That actually makes cc zero quite confusing in Czech republic. You can actually put your work under cc zero, but still, you have to attribute when using licensed work (again in accordance with czech copyright).

Does anyone have similar "copyright-incompatibility" issues regarding CC zero in his jurisdiction? If you do, how do you cope with when promoting CC zero?

Cheers,
Lukas Gruber
CC Czech

-----Original Message-----
From: cc-europe-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org on behalf of Prodromos Tsiavos
Sent: Wed 3/9/2011 10:03 AM
To: Paul Keller
Cc: cc-europe AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [CC-Europe] Europeana and CC0

Dear All,

Many thanks to Paul for giving us a very detailed update and to Alek
for raising the question. As John explained, the fall back position
for CC zero is a license that effectively licenses all economic rights
and -to my opinion- either waives moral rights where this is possible
or does not affect them at all, where waiving is not possible. CC Zero
has not been "ported" but only translated in different languages and
in that sense it should be construed in each jurisdiction in
accordance to the purpose of the transaction (at least in civil law
jurisdictions). With respect to the fall back licence duration, which
may also be a problem, cc0 stipulates that this could be "the maximum
duration provided by applicable law or treaty (including future time
extensions)".

Can you please elaborate on the problems with using CC Zero in Polland?

all the best,
pRo

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:43 AM, Paul Keller <pk AT kl.nl> wrote:
> Hi all,
> first of all thanks john for your take on this, this is why we see CC0 as perfectly usable for europeana as well. i guess this is also why a number of reputable europeana organizations (the British Library, CERN, ...) are comfortable with releasing (meta)data under CC0.
>
> Anyway, it cant harm to give a quick summary of what we are doing with Europeana. We in this case refers to Patrick Peiffer (Bibliotheque National du Luxembourg), Lucie Guibault (IVIR) and myself (Kennisland). As you will note this overlaps with the teams behind CC-LUX and CC-NL, but we are doing this in the name of our own organizations who are participants in the EuropeanaConnect project, where we run a work-package that is tasked with developing a Europeana LIcensing Framework. We are doing this in close corporation with the Europeana Foundation (which runs Europeana) and there are 100s of stakeholders involved (the cultural heritage institutions of Europe)
>
> In very simple terms Europeana is a specialized search portal. Europeana does not crawl the web, but it works on the basis of metadata that is provided to it by the so called data-providers. these actively make available metadata and previews to european. Europeana uses the data it receives to provide the serach functionality (and display results that link to the original objects on the pages of the dat provider) and it also makes the metadata available via a API and will publish all the metadata as linked open data. (not the previews are only used to illustrate search results)
>
> In order to make this possible, there are so called data provider agreements between the data providers and europeana. the current data provider agreements only allow for non commercial use and also contain a share alike - like provision (see: http://www.europeana.eu/portal/termsofservice.html) as you will not these terms look a lot like a CC-BY-NC-SA license but they are not (the reason has to do with database rights, but that is another discussion).
>
> At the time when these agreements where needed to get Europeana working (last spring) this BY-NC-SA like construction was the best that we could get everybody to agree on. obviously it is not a very good construction (because it is (a) non standard and (b) contains the NC restriction which does not make a lot of sense in a Linked Open Data environment) and we have spend the last year on working towards a better solution.
>
> This has resulted in a proposal for a new data provider agreement that would allow Europeana to publish the data it receives under CC0. A first version of this proposal has been circulated in december (and i guess that is what Alek's contact is referring to) and we have been working with the feedback that we have received on an updated version that will be circulated (among europeana stakeholders) later this month. It does indeed push for CC0 as the standard legal tool, and as indicated above that is what we think is best suited for the situation at hand. There are a number of considerations for this:
>
> - we want to place as little restrictions on reuse as possible
> - we want to use a standard legal tool
> - we are talking about descriptive (and for the majority factual) metadata here (which in most cases does not fall under ©protection anyway)
> - the majority of the data comes from publicly funded institutions
>
> if you have read the 'the new renaissance' report by the 'Comité des sages, you might also remember that this is in line with one of their main recommendations:
>
>> Metadata related to the digitized objects produced by the cultural institutions should be widely and freely available for re-use. (p.5)
>
>
> right now it is unclear if we will get this CC0 based approach accepted by all Europeana stakeholders, but there are some promising signs and we are working really had on this, doing lots of workshops etc... To get back to Aleks question, we really think that CC0 is the best tool for this situation and we do not worry about it being inadequate (as John points out the fallback license does not impose a BY requirement so there really is no need to worry about it being inadequate). Happy to answer more specific questions on this as well.
>
> best, paul
>
> p.s the Europeana licensing framework mentioned above contains a number of other elements. among them are standard terms for submitting user generated content to Europeana and it's partners (they mandate that the content can be made available under CC-BY-SA and metadata under CC0). in addition Europeana also allows for communicating the licensing terms of the underlying digital objects held by the data providers in its metadata and supports all Creative Commons licenses as rights statements.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 8 Mar 2011, at 12:38, John Hendrik Weitzmann wrote:
>
>> Hi Alek et al,
>>
>> the fallback in CC0 is less than CC BY, because it lacks the BY. So it's basically an unconditional perpetual world-wide license for everyone. That's why I think it is not really a big deal if someone points to CC0's waiver being disfunctional in Europe. The fallback is just as good legally :)
>>
>> Best
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>> Am 08.03.2011 11:47, schrieb Paul Keller:
>>> Hi Alex and all,
>>> i can give a lot of background information on this (this is something that we are working on with europeana), but i will be offline for the rest of today so i wont be able to do so before tomorrow... /paul
>>>
>>> On 8 Mar 2011, at 11:13, Alek Tarkowski wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear all,
>>>>
>>>> I've just been told by a POlish librarian working for Europeana Local
>>>> that Europeana is considering using CC0 for metadata. THis means of
>>>> course, that the mechanism would be pushed to a broad range of digital
>>>> libraries in Europe.
>>>>
>>>> Since this will be something that will affect us all, I wonder whether
>>>> we shouldn't have a common position on this. My worry relates to the
>>>> well known problems with whether CC0 is a valid mechanism in European
>>>> legal systems. I know there is the CC BY fallback, , and some reasons to
>>>> use a disfunctional mechanism with a functional fallback (to make a
>>>> statement with how this should be done, as opposed to can be done) - but
>>>> I still feel uneasy with this solution, if we'll de facto end up using
>>>> CC BY for metadata, why not just license it with CC BY? It's a quite
>>>> confusing construction in an already esoteric field of metadata licensing.
>>>>
>>>> Paul, I assume you might know a lot about this, I'd be happy to learn
>>>> what you think.
>>>>
>>>> And grateful for any other thoughts.
>>>>
>>>> As a side note, in Poland we haven't implemented CC0 for abovementioned
>>>> reasons - anyone else has the same problem? Or even better, anyone has
>>>> found a working solution for this, a way to think about CC0 in their
>>>> jurisdiction?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Alek
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> dr Alek Tarkowski
>>>> koordynator / public lead
>>>> Creative Commons Polska / Poland
>>>> www: http://creativecommons.pl
>>>> identica: http://identi.ca/alek
>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/atarkowski
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> CC-Europe mailing list
>>>> CC-Europe AT lists.ibiblio.org
>>>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-europe
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CC-Europe mailing list
>>> CC-Europe AT lists.ibiblio.org
>>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-europe
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CC-Europe mailing list
>> CC-Europe AT lists.ibiblio.org
>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-europe
>
> _______________________________________________
> CC-Europe mailing list
> CC-Europe AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-europe
>
_______________________________________________
CC-Europe mailing list
CC-Europe AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-europe