Development of Creative Commons licenses

[drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com>]

On Friday 25 March 2005 05:41 am, Peter Brink wrote:
> drew Roberts skrev:
> > So, to stir it up a little bit here: (using the bsd side of the bsd vs
> > gpl "controversy") are people in Sweden, where they cannot give a general
> > waiver of their moral rights, "less free" than people in other countries
> > where they can do so or where they do not exist and so the people are not
> > restrained by the law in that area?
> >
> > Be gentle in you answers if you will. (Take this elsewhere if needed.)
>
> Short answer: no
>
> Longer answer:
>
> As you might be aware of there are two different "copyright" traditions:
> the Anglo-American copyright tradition and the European Author's right
> tradition. As the term "Author's right" implies the copyright laws of
> Europe focuses on the Originator. The result of a human beings creative
> effort is in Europe seen as an extension of that beings person. In
> essence an Author's right is a human right (indeed in Sweden all
> creators have a right to a copyright and that right is granted by the
> constitution). An infringement on a creation is thus more like a
> personal insult to the creator than a theft of physical property. In
> fact, the moral rights are the source of the copying right - the creator
> is the only one who should be able to make a profit from the result of
> her own creative efforts.
>
> Think of moral rights as the equivalent of the legal rules regarding
> slander and other abuses of other peoples integrity. Such rules are
> necessary for a healthy society - that our freedom of speech is thus
> restricted does no really make us less free. A persons freedom to behave
> in any fashion he wants must always be checked against the freedom of
> others and the respect for other peoples fundamental human rights.
>
I don't necessarily disagree, and am thankful for the information as to how 
things work over there.

However, the answer is not framed in parallel to the GPL vs BSD more free 
arguments.

If we are going to play the stir it up game, it will not work unless we try 
to 
draw the parallels.

Back to serious though:

Since this is a CC discussion and to my understanding CC was created to 
promote the health of the artistic/intellectual commons, how do moral rights 
impact the commons, from the points of view of initial injection and of 
subsequent use?

all the best,

drew