Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: [cc-community] Re: CC licenses and "moral rights"

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com>
  • To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-community] Re: CC licenses and "moral rights"
  • Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 10:57:03 -0500

On Tuesday 29 March 2005 09:50 am, Rob Myers wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 29, 2005, at 03:25PM, Greg London <email AT greglondon.com>
wrote:
> >Oh for cripes sake. Software patents, heinous as they are, are manadatory
> > law. The GNU-GPL licenses rights to its works as long as no one uses a
> > software patent to create a proprietary version of the work.
> >If someone secures a software patent, they do not have the right to
> >use GNU-GPL code to do so.
>
> Conditionalising downstream use on not asserting moral rights was one of
> the suggestions I made for handling moral rights in the CC-UK licenses.
>
> Preventing someone from using patents to make a proprietary version of a
> work is different from preventing them from using moral rights to undermine
> a project, though. Moral rights are automatic, you don't have to pay for
> them as you do for patents. You can agree to avoid creating patents, you
> cannot agree to avoid creating moral rights (in most jurisdictions).
>
> But a conditionalised license would *not* prevent you from asserting your
> rights, it would just remove your license to the work if you did.

This is also true wrt the GPL and people currently in posession of patents.

Exactly, so if this is possible, you could then assert your moral rights to
your creation but then you would lose the rgihts I have given you to my
creation.

Alternately, I could grant you a license to my work for the amount of X where
payment is due plus interest on the date you assert your moral rights
somewhere.

> So your
> rights are unaffected. Whether this would be problematic in any given
> jurisdiction I couldn't say.
>

And again, if moral rights are constrained in such a way so that they do not
cause problems in practice, all of this thinking may end up having been
unnecessary.

all the best,

drew




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page