Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-europe - Re: [CC-Europe] EDRI

cc-europe AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Cc-europe mailing list

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Teresa Nobre <teresaraposonobre AT gmail.com>
  • To: Gisle Hannemyr <gisle AT ifi.uio.no>
  • Cc: cc-europe AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [CC-Europe] EDRI
  • Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2012 10:57:37 +0100

"What is the problem?"?! Do you have any problems with me having a misinterpretation problem?

I asked for CC HQ clarification, because Diane's message is not clear to me, in view of Mike's post (and many other things, including Diane's last sentence "This position is re-examined periodically"). Do you have any problems with me asking *them* that or do you want to have the last saying on this interpretation problem?

Best,

Teresa

2012/4/2 Gisle Hannemyr <gisle AT ifi.uio.no>
On 01.04.2012 23:31, Teresa Nobre wrote:
> Well, I think that's imposible for an organisation like CC to be completely
> apolitical and, except maybe for the criminalisation discussion, I thought
> CC had official positions about the 2 other areas I mentioned, ie, that it
> was officially against government interference with the Internet

I hope not.

The subject of Internet governance is a very complex one.
As a proponent of network neutrality, I regard government interference
with the Internet an absolute necessity, as  the traditional
monopolies that owns the net certainly cannot be trusted with this.
(I can see a need for a discussion about the limits and scope of
this government interference, but I don't think the Creative Commons
is the right arena for having that discussion.)

And I've not seen any *offical* statement from CC HQ about
government interference (I do not regard the messages about
protesting SOPA/PIPA, etc. on http://creativecommons.org/weblog
as anything more than news items blogged because they were
presumed by whoever posted them to be news of interest to the
CC community - which they obviously are).

> and in favour of broader exceptions to copyright.

I hope not.

All the licenses and tools (including the upcoming 4.0 version) is
carefully written to make the best possible use of *existing*
exceptions to copyright and neighbouring rights.


Here's my position:

I simply do not understand the rationale behind contaminating the
public service mission of CC with political activism - no matter
of noble the cause is.

Political activism will make CC less capable of carrying out its
mission.  If CC chooses to *also* become a political activist group,
those that do not agree with its politics will be less willing to
accept the tools and licenses made available by the CC as a public
service.

There exists many fine organizations that lobby for copyright reform,
not-government interference, and the right to copy for non-commercial
purposes, etc. (e.g. EFF, EDRI, FSF, etc.)  If you feel so strongly
about these things, why do you not work for these organisations
instead?

The CC is different from those organisations.  It mission is to offer
a service to the public in the shape of tools and licences.  Becoming
a political organisation will (IMHO) make it more difficult to carry
out that mission.

> If that's not true, then I'm
> sure having a problem in interpreting CC HQ positions.

What is the problem?

Well, we've already had the CC HQ position on this, in a message
posted to this list on March 29 by Diane Cabell (Corporate Counsel,
Creative Commons).  She wrote:

 "Although CC was established in response to inappropriate law, it
  was not established as an advocacy organization."
 [...]
 "The CC Board's traditional position has been that when a policy
  might interfere with the function of CC's licenses and tools --
  or prevent them from being used -- then an advocacy effort may
  be appropriate. "

I think that is pretty clear language.  *Only* when a policy might
interfere with the function of CC's licenses and tools - or prevent
them from being used - then, and only then, does CC take up an
official position and makes an advocacy effort for that position.

I think we've already have agreed that ACTA, SOPA, PIPA, etc.
do *not* interfere with CC's licenses and tools, so I really
do not understand why we're still having this discussion?

> Since I agree with you that we shouldn't have opposing positions when we
> are talking from our CC affiliate's positions and I'm giving taks/lectures
> about those issues almost every week, I would request some clarification
> from CC HQ.

As far as I am concerned, I've already received clarification
from CC HQ (on March 29th).  I am satisfied with that clarification.
--
- gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://folk.uio.no/gisle/ ]
========================================================================
   "Don't follow leaders // Watch the parkin' meters" - Bob Dylan
_______________________________________________
CC-Europe mailing list
CC-Europe AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-europe



--

Teresa Nobre, LL.M. IP (MIPLC)

Intellectual Property Consultant | Legal Project Lead Creative Commons Portugal
M: (+351) 963491398 | E: 
teresaraposonobre AT gmail.com  | Skype: tenobre
www.linkedin.com/in/teresanobre

| The information contained in this communication may be confidential, is intended only for the use of the recipient named above, and may be legally privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.  If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering this communication to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication, or any of its contents, is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error, please re-send this communication to the sender and delete the original message and any copy of it from your computer system. Thank you. | 

| If this communication is related with Creative Commons Portugal, please note: the information contained in this communication is not intended to be legal advice nor should it be relied upon as, or represented to be legal advice. Creative Commons Portugal cannot and does not give legal advice. |






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page