Development of Creative Commons licenses

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

On Friday 25 March 2005 09:42 am, Peter Brink wrote:
> drew Roberts skrev:
> > I think it is a stretch too, but I am still in court having to defend
> > myself. Now, perhaps the lawsuit game is played differently in your
> > country than in the US, but this looks like serious problems for the US.
> > You could be harrassed endlessly.
>
> Moral rights is not (such) an issue in the US. A discussion on how to
> solve moral rights issues with CC licenses is not likely to be very
> meaningful based on US law...

Ah, but the world seems to be moving to cross border enforcement. Wasn't 
there 
a news item recently of a man in Australia getting extradited to the US (or 
in the process of getting extradited) for copyright violations when he has 
never been to the US? 

>
> > Question, could a rich man with a grudge buy up all of the artworks of a
> > particular, say sculptur, and destroy them all?
> >
> > Legally that is.

So, if that rich person with a grudge was a right wing US cowboy and the 
artist was a left wing Frenchman, could the artist file suit in France 
against the destructin of his statues in the US?

Would extradition be possible? (From something I read, I think not as it said 
extradition does not apply unless the act in question is a crime in both 
countries. Anyone know if this is how it works?)

If the American goes to France for a vacation or for a business trip, could 
the French authorities pick him up when he enters the country?

>
> Well the rule is that if you own a copy of a work then you may do
> whatever you like with it. Some works only exist as a original
> (buildings, paintings and sculptures are good examples), 

This is why I picked a sculpture.

I have been told recently that buildings have a special exemption allowing 
for 
their destruction. (I think the person who told me was referring to US law 
though.)

> and then it's 
> reasonable that the artist could object. In your example I guess that if
> the artist became aware of the project he could try to stop it. If the
> artwork already had been destroyed, I think that in some jurisdictions
> (France for example) the artist would have a case. But this is a rather
> esoteric case.

Perhaps not as esoteric as you think, didn't Bill Cosby buy the copyrights to 
the Little Rascals so as to prevent them from being seen again?

By the way, since I am trying to learn, I am purposefully exploring the edges 
of applicability when it comes to moral rights. The normal, middle of the 
road cases are a little easier to get.

all the best,

drew