Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: Public Domain dedication

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: Public Domain dedication
  • Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 19:01:47 +0100

On 26 Mar 2005, at 9:12, Rob Myers wrote:
> On 26 Mar 2005, at 02:34, drew Roberts wrote:

> > Do you need to claim authorship in order to relicense and claim
> > copyright to something in the public domain?
>
> You get copyright in anything you write automatically, so you don't
> have to claim it in order to have it.
>
> Since you get it automatically you do have to make an effort to
> dedicate it to the public domain. I'm sure I've heard that there are
> some jurisdictions where copyright is inalienable so you can't do
> this. I don't remember where though. I think it might have been
> somewhere in Scandinavia.

I think (IANAL) there may be the following problems:
- Some rights (some moral for instance) are inalienable
- Copyright enforcement is spread over several institutions, courts
of law only being one of them

IIRC, in the Netherlands the collection agencies (the ones that make
some wholesale copying possible and legal) are opposing public domain
dedications. That is, I as an author can legally dedicate a work to
the public domain, but a radio station that only plays songs that
were dedicated to the PD will still have to pay levies.

> >> Of course you cannot claim that you wrote Shakespear, but can't you
> >> print and sell a Book of Shakespear and mark it "All Rights
> >> Reserved"?
> >
> > People seem to do things like this all the time. Still:
>
> You cannot legally do this. In the US it's actually an offence to do
> so, I'm told.

Australia too, but I have yet to hear about legal action based on
this part of the law. Pity.

> > So, perhaps they are claiming copyright in the layout, typography,
> > selection of works and order of works chosen. Illustrations? I don't
> > know. But I do remember reading something like I said recently. I
> > don't know if it is correct, and if it is if it applies everywhere.
>
> You would need to claim copyright on either the typographic
> arrangement or, if you add or combine stuff, the aggregate work. Dover
> and clip art publishers do the aggregate thing, I'm guessing
> Shakespeare republishers do the typography thing.

In many jurisdictions you need to do more than sweat of the brow work
to claim a copyright on the derivative, and the orginal work is still
not copyrighted. That is, if you can extract the original from the
derivative, you are in the clear. YMMV. IANAL.

--
branko collin
collin AT xs4all.nl




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page