Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-europe - Re: [CC-Europe] request for input: database rights in CC v4.0

cc-europe AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Cc-europe mailing list

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Sarah Pearson <sarah AT creativecommons.org>
  • To: "T. Margoni" <t.margoni AT uva.nl>
  • Cc: "cc-europe AT lists.ibiblio.org" <cc-europe AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [CC-Europe] request for input: database rights in CC v4.0
  • Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 20:24:43 -0800

Thank you to everyone for your responses! If anyone else plans to comment, please try to send something by the end of the day tomorrow (Thursday). We still plan to publish the draft on Friday to all affiliates. Note that if you do not have time to comment now, there will be plenty of opportunity during the public comment period.

Thanks again!
best,
Sarah

On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 5:17 AM, T. Margoni <t.margoni AT uva.nl> wrote:
Hi all!

I have another observation regarding point 4 of Sarah's original email:

> 4. As explained above, the license does not apply where permission is
> not otherwise required by law. This will create situations, for >
example, where someone shares a licensed database without attributing >
the licensor because SGDRs do not apply to that person. In those >
situations, it will be impossible for downstream recipients of the >
database to know that the original licensor has SGDRs in the database, >
or that the licensor applied a CC license at all. If, for example, > >
the downstream recipient is in the EU, will she be in violation of > the
original licensor’s SGDRs if she extracts the database contents > from
the person to whom SGDRs do not apply and subsequently reuses > those
contents without attribution? And if so, are there ways this > problem
can be resolved through our licenses or otherwise?

If I get this right a plausible situation is: A is in EU, B in US, C in EU.
A licenses a DB (SGDR) under SA, B makes a derivative of such DB and
does not apply a SA, but, say, a CC-BY. B's activity is fine since SGDR
does not apply to him. C takes B's DB, and derives further, distributing
only under BY.
I would say that if in C's DB there is a substantial portion of A's DB,
then C is bound by SA, since SGDR applies to him. Plus, if I am right, C
gets a direct license from A for the part of B's derivative that
constitutes A's original DB (a substantial part thereof).

C should be able to know what parts formed the original DB if due notice
is given under Attribution. The problem to link the original licensor
(A) and its eligibility for SGDR persists though.

A suggestion in FAQ or chooser to indicate whether licensors are EU (or
other relevant jurisdictions) based in the Attribution? This, reported
also in metadata, could help. Not sure though if it could create other
types of problems, especially when we have A-Zn...

Interested on others thoughts!






On 2013-01-28 10:50 PM, Sarah Pearson wrote:
> As Federico points out, I think we are talking about two different
> scenarios here.
>
> 1) A licensor applies BY-SA to a database, in which case it is assumed
> the license applies to any rights the licensor has in the database
> structure (copyright and/or SGDRs) _and_ any rights he or she has in the
> database contents.
>
> 2) A licensee extracts and reuses a substantial portion of a
> BY-SA-licensed database in his own separate database in which he has
> SGDRs, in which case the obligation to ShareAlike only extends to the
> rights he has in the database structure (copyright and/or SGDRs).
>
> In any case, it is obvious these concepts are not entirely clear. We
> will work on refining the definition of Adapted Material to better
> convey concept #2 above. Does anyone think we should also try to
> articulate concept #1 in the license text itself, or is this something
> we should continue to explain outside the license? Alternatively, we
> would be interested to know if anyone thinks this is the wrong default.
> (For example, a licensor should have to apply two separate licenses to a
> database in order to cover its structure and its contents, similar to
> how the ODbL works.)
>
> Also, I wanted to mention one point related to the third issue for
> feedback noted in the policy document. As Thomas rightly pointed out,
> substantiality could be determined quantitatively or qualitatively.
> However, in all cases it would be determined with reference to the
> licensed database. Where that licensed database is small, a
> quantitatively or qualitatively substantial portion may be relatively
> insignificant. Nonetheless, as currently written in the draft language,
> that insignificant portion (although substantial when viewed in
> reference to the database from which it was extracted) will cause entire
> databases to be shared alike. Is this the right outcome?
>
> best,
> Sarah
>
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 5:47 AM, Federico Morando
> <federico.morando AT polito.it <mailto:federico.morando AT polito.it>> wrote:
>
>     On 01/28/2013 02:07 PM, T. Margoni wrote:
>     > I am getting a bit lost. With "its content" are we not referring again
>     > to the same pictures of Federico's example that we agreed are not
>     > covered by the license?
>     This is how I understand this point:
>     - SA does not require the application of the same license to the
>     pictures in my example (i.e. the viral aspect does not extend to the
>     content of the database, e.g. in cases in which you add proprietary
>     content to an existing CC BY-SA-licensed database); but
>     - if you just apply a CC BY-SA (for instance) license to a database,
>     your general purpose standard licensing statement ("pointing" to the DB
>     as a whole) is interpret as concerning the entire database and its
>     content.
>
>     So, I think we basically agree, but we're talking about two different
>     scenarios,
>
>     best,
>
>     Federico
>
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     CC-Europe mailing list
>     CC-Europe AT lists.ibiblio.org <mailto:CC-Europe AT lists.ibiblio.org>
>     http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-europe
>
>

--
Dr. Thomas Margoni
Institute for Information Law (IViR) - Faculty of Law
University of Amsterdam - The Netherlands
http://ssrn.com/author=1383303
_______________________________________________
CC-Europe mailing list
CC-Europe AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-europe




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page