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: Timothy Vollmer <tvol AT creativecommons.org>
  • Cc: cc-europe AT lists.ibiblio.org, regional AT creativecommons.org, Catherine Casserly <cathy AT creativecommons.org>
  • Subject: Re: [CC-Europe] EDRI
  • Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2012 11:24:10 +0100

Dear Timothy,

Thank you very much for your clarifications. 

I must confess I am a bit surprised with those because 1) I thought CC had somehow taken part on the activities against PIPA and SOPA, and 2) I thought that CC, being part of the OER movement and being aware that most of the countries in the world do not have fair use as US does and a lot of them do not have proper exceptions for educational purposes (e.g. I cannot watch a movie - not even if it's an Youtube movie - in a class for educational purposes, unless the movie belongs to the school library), had somehow a positive position on copyright exceptions. And then I (mis)understood that CC was to be part of WIPO's discussion towards a future copyright reform... 

I will start clarifying that CC has no official positions about any of those subjects (including the criminalisation of non-commercial uses of copyrighted works, which you did not mentioned and therefore I'm putting in the same bag of "no official positions"). That's not a problem for me, but I'm afraid CC will stop being hold in such high regard by a lot of people from the free/culture movements because of that (sure you understand that not having a position can sometimes be as harmful as having a position).

Best,

Teresa

2012/4/4 Timothy Vollmer <tvol AT creativecommons.org>
Hey all: 
Thanks Jonas for the ping on this thread--it’s been an extremely interesting and useful discussion. RE: Teresa’s question: From what I can ascertain CC doesn’t have official positions on 1) being against government interference with the Internet and 2) in favour of broader exceptions to copyright. Of course sometimes board members or staff might discuss such matters, but they do so in an individual capacity.

As for supporting/opposing policy issues, Diane Cabell already noted that this may sometimes include making statements on specific legislation/regulation/policy (as opposed to broad, blanket assertions) when such things interfere with the mission of the organization or how the CC licenses and tools work. And for sure this could include positive interventions too (and not simply in just pointing out when bad policies come up). There is a process set up for this, which involves the CEO, staff, and board (where appropriate). We are also currently discussing how to improve communication and be more inclusive of affiliate opinions and feedback with regard to policy issues.

Regarding affiliate activities, CC does not discourage you from taking positions on various policy issues, so long as it is clear that they are individual positions and not those of the organization. The ability of our affiliates to engage in policy discussions -- and sometimes advocacy work in situations and places where CC cannot -- is one of the many great values that affiliates bring to CC. Each situation might be a bit different, judgement calls will sometimes have to be made, and the MOU serves as the baseline. But in simple form, it might be broken down into something like:

- if you purport to speak on behalf of CC (as opposed to a particular affiliate), you should get CC HQ's approval first. You can send such requests through to your Regional Project Manager, Jessica as the Affiliate Network Coordinator, or myself as the Policy Manager;
- if you purport to speak on behalf of the local affiliate, you are free to make your own statements, as long as they align with CC’s vision and mission, and we'd appreciate it if you kept CC HQ informed so we properly understand the issues;
- if you are commenting in your private capacity or on behalf of a separate legal entity, you are clearly free to say what you will

Sorry for the long winded response. Of course HQ is happy to discuss this more should other questions arise. 

timothy

On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Paul Keller <paul AT creativecommons.org> wrote:

On 2 Apr 2012, at 16:35, Alek Tarkowski wrote:

> Dear Gisle (and everyone else),
>
> It seems that our discussion boils down to this: does promotion and
> stewardship of CC licenses is a form of advocacy done differently? If
> so, then CC should for example support, at least to some extent, legal
> reform that makes our voluntary mechanisms part of the law itself. And
> if it's not, CC should be agnostic towards any copyright reform.
>
> I personally believe that since I am promoting voluntary mechanisms
> within a copyright system and suggesting this system is flawed without
> them, I should also be in favour of a reform of this system in this
> direction. I am willing to accept that this is only my personal belief
> and that CC's approach is more "agnostic". But at the same time I feel
> that 10th anniversary is maybe a good moment to go back to basics and
> ask "why are we doing this?". Especially that many of the affiliates, by
> virtue of doing other projects than just CC (and probably the HQ is the
> only org in our network focusing *solely* on CC licensing) are involved
> in different forms of advocacy.

Hi Alek and all,
i fully agree with pretty much alek says here. However i find the idea that CC is currently not involved in advocacy quite puzzling. As far as i can tell CC-HQ has regularly been involved in advocacy. Examples that come to mind are the recent protests against SOPA/PIPA but also the work that has been undertaken by COMMUNIA. CC is one of the initial signatories of the Public Domain Manifest produced by COMMUNIA <http://www.publicdomainmanifesto.org/> and as far as i am concerned that advocates policy changes that go well beyond issues that directly affect the ability to use CC-licenses and other tools.

> And the sociologist in me thinks that this would be a perfect subject
> for a research study about the users of our licenses: I don't think we
> have any source of knowledge beyond the anecdotal that could tell us,
> are CC licenses being used in a "political" or "utilitarian" way (to
> describe things very broadly).
>
> Gisle, when you suggest that we should oppose any activities that make
> CC licenses redundant - I must admit I find such an approach shocking.
> But again, this all depends on the answer to the question: why do we
> promote CC licenses?

in line with the public domain manifesto i would argue because we believe that the public domain needs to be expanded and one (but not the only) way to do so is the 'voluntary relinquishment of rights'…
/paul

> All the best, and thanks for this really interesting exchange of viewpoints!
>
> 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



--
Timothy Vollmer
phone = +016086982403 | skype = timothyvollmer | tw = @tvol


_______________________________________________
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