Development of Creative Commons licenses

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

On Tuesday 29 March 2005 11:26 am, Peter Brink wrote:
> Rob Myers skrev:
> > But a conditionalised license would *not* prevent you from asserting your
> > rights, it would just remove your license to the work if you did. So
> >
>  > your rights are unaffected. Whether this would be problematic in
>  > any given jurisdiction I couldn't say.
>
> The problem is that a mandatory rule is protected from being made part
> of a contract, you are simply not allowed to use such a condition.
>
> Here in Sweden you may not swap benefits protected by mandatory rules
> (and moral rights are an excellent example of such a benefit) with
> another benefit. That is - if you offer the benefit of being able to
> freely distribute copies and derivative works you may *not* make that
> offer dependent upon a waiver of moral rights...
>
> /Peter Brink

It is comming clearer now, that right cannot be included in a contract. (And 
in Sweden, all licneses are considered contracts?) So it remains to be seen 
whether people from each side can figure out how to play nicely with those on 
the other to the benefit of the community. Like I brought up elsewhere, I 
wonder how religion will play in this.

Examples of almost sensible moral rights assertions that failed in court 
would 
be useful to help those from nmrcs (non-moral rights countries) understand 
the rules of the game.

all the best,

drew