Development of Creative Commons licenses

["Mail Delivery System" <MAILER-DAEMON AT fastmail.fm>]

This is the Postfix program at host fastmail.fm.

I'm sorry to have to inform you that the message returned
below could not be delivered to one or more destinations.

For further assistance, please send mail to <postmaster>

If you do so, please include this problem report. You can
delete your own text from the message returned below.

      The Postfix program

<disneylogic AT fastmail.fm>: data format error. Command output: disneylogic: 
Mailbox does not exist
Reporting-MTA: dns; fastmail.fm
Arrival-Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2003  6:18 PM

Final-Recipient: rfc822; disneylogic AT fastmail.fm
Action: failed
Status: 5.0.0
Diagnostic-Code: X-Postfix;
	data format error. Command output: disneylogic: Mailbox does
	not exist

--- Begin Message ---

• From: cc-licenses-request AT lists.ibiblio.org
• To: cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
• Subject: cc-licenses Digest, Vol 7, Issue 6
• Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2003 12:02:03 -0400 (EDT)

Send cc-licenses mailing list submissions to
cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
cc-licenses-request AT lists.ibiblio.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
cc-licenses-owner AT lists.ibiblio.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of cc-licenses digest..."
Today's Topics:

1. how to use By licensed materials (long) (Tomoaki Watanabe)
2. My Blogging Engine using CC (Tom Morris)
3. Re: how to use By licensed materials (long) (Lorenzo De Tomasi)
4. Personal opinions and Attribution-ShareAlike (by-sa) license
(Lorenzo De Tomasi)

--- Begin Message ---

• From: "Tomoaki Watanabe" <tomoaki_watanabe_cc AT hotmail.com>
• To: cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
• Subject: how to use By licensed materials (long)
• Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 20:46:46 +0000

Hello. I'm working on a collaborative project to publish a booklet (illustrated guide for beginners) on CC, using readily available (CC-licensed) materials. And of course, we would like to license the booklet under a CC license (by or by-sa, most probably). I and some others have some questions regarding license terms, etc. and would like to get someone's help on how to use CCPL'd works.

(The publication will be in Japanese, by the way, and will be published in Japan.)

(1) How to give "Attribution"

If we (the booklet team) were to use multiple by-licensed works (each from separate author), and make modifications (layout, font, add drawings), etc, as opposed to simply compiling verbatim copy of each licensed work, how should we give credits to the original authors of the materials? Three different ideas came up to my mind:

(a) We can just list all the authors at the end of the booklet along with our names. This way, the readers of the booklet cannot distinguish which ones are the booklet authors, which ones are the authors of the materials used for the booklets.

(b) We should make a list in (year, author) format, just like some typical CD does, to indicate different copyright holders at different stages of production. But we do not have to explain anything further than that. Readers of the booklet can "guess," or do some research to find out whose contributions are what.

(c) We should specify which section of the booklet used which work, with copyright holder of the work, title of the work, & year.


The license text of 4-b seems to indicate that: (b) is the standard, but (a) is okay if there is no reasonable possibility to do anything beyond that (like in case of a CD), and maybe styles like (c) should be used if reasonably possible.

(2) When others use the booklet, how should they make attribution?

Now suppose the project goes well and the booklet sells quite a bit. And to our pleasure, some people think they want to produce an "alternative version" of the
booklet - changing layouts and drawings to their taste, replacing texts with more relevant stuff, etc.

The first-generation booklet is licensed CC-by, so the authors of the alternative version can make modifications freely as they see fit.

But what if they have decided to take just 2 chapters (out of 5) from the booklet, and expand on them? And say, among the list of 10 authors listed at the end of the booklet, only 2 people are relevant.

For example, suppose that the first-generaion booklet contained a piece about how CC license have been used by different artists and creators. The text was a derivative work of another person's piece (CC-by'ed), and that author is not part of the booklet project. Now his piece is completely dropped from the "alternative version," but the attribution would still remain because the authors of the alternative version do not know the details of whose works were in which chapters.

Or, by any chance, the copyright information of the booklet team and that of the source materials are treated differently?

In other words, "Original Author" in the license of the booklet mean the booklet team? or it includes all authors of the source materials (they are all CC-By) that the booklet have used, and the booklet team?


(3) Can materials under By & By-sa integrated and licensed under By-sa?

Now this is a different question. Can we take a material under By, modify, and
release the modified work under different license, such as By-sa or even Nc?

By comparing the lisence terms 4-b of by and by-sa, I got the impression that it is the case.

If so, I can, for example, translate the creative commons FAQ and
release it with proper attribution under public domain. (It sounds strange that the copyright notice is attached to the public domain text, though...)

Other people then are free to remove the attribution from the PD work.

best regards,

Tomo

_________________________________________________________________
Get MSN 8 Dial-up Internet Service FREE for one month. Limited time offer-- sign up now! http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup


--- End Message ---

--- Begin Message ---

• From: Tom Morris <tom%bbcity.co.uk AT bbcity.co.uk>
• To: <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
• Subject: My Blogging Engine using CC
• Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2003 9:16:34 -0000

I've just coded up a facility for GLUE, a collaborative blogging engine that
I use on my site, to have CC licences for each individual weblogger. It's
only at a beta stage at the moment and I hope to improve it over the next
few weeks.

The technology challenge didn't inspire me to do it, but it did boot me up
the rear end and got me to finish coding it.

What happens is when the user goes in to the control panel, their licencing
to either 'All Rights Reserved' (the default setting), public domain or any
of the different CC licences (they are listed by name).

The announcement is here:
http://www.bbcity.co.uk/entry/232

And the code release (GPL) is here:
http://tinyurl.com/qjzk

I realise the code is a bit clunky, but it has been hacked together.

Anyway, the fundamental thing is: Creative Commons, which kicks ass, is now
available for users of my site and any other GLUE-powered website that adds
this functionality.

Tom Morris
www.bbcity.co.uk


--- End Message ---

--- Begin Message ---

• From: Lorenzo De Tomasi <lorenzo.detomasi AT creativecommons.it>
• To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
• Subject: Re: how to use By licensed materials (long)
• Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2003 16:15:12 +0200

on 10-10-2003 22:46, Tomoaki Watanabe at tomoaki_watanabe_cc AT hotmail.com
wrote:

> Hello. I'm working on a collaborative project to publish a booklet
> (illustrated guide for beginners) on CC, using readily available
> (CC-licensed) materials. And of course, we would like to license the booklet
> under a CC license (by or by-sa, most probably). I and some others have some
> questions regarding license terms, etc. and would like to get someone's help
> on how to use CCPL'd works.
>
> (The publication will be in Japanese, by the way, and will be published in
> Japan.)
>
> (1) How to give "Attribution"
>
> If we (the booklet team) were to use multiple by-licensed works (each from
> separate author), and make modifications (layout, font, add drawings), etc,
> as opposed to simply compiling verbatim copy of each licensed work, how
> should we give credits to the original authors of the materials? Three
> different ideas came up to my mind:
>
> (a) We can just list all the authors at the end of the booklet along with
> our names. This way, the readers of the booklet cannot distinguish which
> ones are the booklet authors, which ones are the authors of the materials
> used for the booklets.
>
> (b) We should make a list in (year, author) format, just like some typical
> CD does, to indicate different copyright holders at different stages of
> production. But we do not have to explain anything further than that.
> Readers of the booklet can "guess," or do some research to find out whose
> contributions are what.
>
> (c) We should specify which section of the booklet used which work, with
> copyright holder of the work, title of the work, & year.

I must specify that I'm not a member of the CC staff.
I was going to ask similar questions to CC about the attribution license.
My suggestion is to specify which section of the booklet used which work,
with copyright holder of the work, title of the work, & year.

Something like: This work (by <Author name>) is in partially original and
partially derivative, i.e. realized quoting and modifying the following
original works:
<Author name>, <Work title>, <Publisher>, <year of publication>

This is only my suggestion and would like to hear your opinions.

> (2) When others use the booklet, how should they make attribution?
>
> Now suppose the project goes well and the booklet sells quite a bit. And to
> our pleasure, some people think they want to produce an "alternative
> version" of the
> booklet - changing layouts and drawings to their taste, replacing texts with
> more relevant stuff, etc.
>
> The first-generation booklet is licensed CC-by, so the authors of the
> alternative version can make modifications freely as they see fit.
>
> But what if they have decided to take just 2 chapters (out of 5) from the
> booklet, and expand on them? And say, among the list of 10 authors listed at
> the end of the booklet, only 2 people are relevant.
>
> For example, suppose that the first-generation booklet contained a piece
> about how CC license have been used by different artists and creators. The
> text was a derivative work of another person's piece (CC-by'ed), and that
> author is not part of the booklet project. Now his piece is completely
> dropped from the "alternative version," but the attribution would still
> remain because the authors of the alternative version do not know the
> details of whose works were in which chapters.
>
> Or, by any chance, the copyright information of the booklet team and that of
> the source materials are treated differently?

I can suggest 2 solutions:

1. a sort of tree, like

<Last author, work>
<Previous author, work>
<Previous author, work>
<Pre-previous author, work>
<Pre-previous author, work>
...
<Previous author, work>
...
<Last author, work>
...

2. to cite only the works you have modified directly. Other authors and
works can be found on the works you have modified. I prefer this, because
it's easier and faster... finally, bibliographies have worked in this way
for centuries... This can be the basic information that everyone MUST
include, free to enrich them.
I'm curious to hear your opinions :-)


--- End Message ---

--- Begin Message ---

• From: Lorenzo De Tomasi <lorenzo.detomasi AT creativecommons.it>
• To: <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
• Subject: Personal opinions and Attribution-ShareAlike (by-sa) license
• Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2003 17:22:33 +0200

If I realize a work, for example a text full of personal opinions, and I
distribute it under a CC attribution license others can "copy, distribute,
display, and perform my copyrighted work ‹ and derivative works based upon
it ‹ but only if they give me credit and if they distribute derivative works
only under a license identical to the license that governs my work".
I can have decided to do this because the text is an essay and I want to
start and stimulate a debate giving the possibility also to quote big parts
of the text that may exceed the limit permitted by fair use principles. I
can also agree that people delete parts to add their personal opinions.
For example I can submit the essay in a Mailing list and stimulate a debate.
ML members can express their opinions, modify the text as they want and
create their own versions. Then I can collect some opinions by other people
I agree with and I can write a new different and more complete text...

So, when someone realizes a derivative work, this work can be made of
1. quoted text identical to the original one
2. text modified from the original

If the content of the text is objective (like a list of events or laws) it's
not a problem if the original author will be cited between the authors of
the new work, but
if the content of the text is subjective, if the text is full of personal
opinions, it's important
1. to differentiate quoted text from modified text or
2. to specify that the work has been modified from an original work by
another author and that may include opinions different from the ones of the
original author.
This because the author of the original work can be in contrast with the
opinions expressed in the derivative work and, citing him simply as one of
the authors of the derivative work, can induce people to attribute to him
also the opinions expressed in the derivative work. This can also be used
intentionally in dangerous ways.

I think that CC licenses must be revised considering these problems.
What's your opinion?

Thank you for your attention :-)


--- End Message ---

_______________________________________________
cc-licenses mailing list
cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses

--- End Message ---