Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: Copyright of derivative work released under a CC licence

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Branko Collin" <collin AT xs4all.nl>
  • To: "Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts" <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: Copyright of derivative work released under a CC licence
  • Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 16:13:11 +0100

On 3 Dec 2004, at 9:31, Greg London wrote:
> Branko Collin said:

> > I (who is NAL) don't think that is important. You tried to reproduce
> > the original, not merely to be 'inspired' by it. Just because you
> > did not wholly succeed, does not mean it is not a reproduction, and
> > therefore a derivation. Your template is not an independent
> > creation. Although we can argue whether it is technically a
> > derivation, it certainly is morally one. The law intended this to be
> > called derivation and an act of restricted copying.
>
> Im not a lawyer, and I never heard of a "moral derivative" until now.
>
> It is perfectly possible to "reproduce the original"
> and still be an independent work.

The work in questions has two forms to it, namely the source code
(which is, indeed, probably solely the 'property' of the author under
US copyright law), and the way it renders to the screen.

One could argue that HTML is not dependent on a physical medium, but
surely the author made the template very much for a specific physical
medium.

Surely there is jurisprudence to support the claim that both the
underlying and the physical appearance are covered by copyright? Any
idea where I can look up these things?

--
branko collin
collin AT xs4all.nl




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page