Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Peter Brink <peter.brink AT brinkdata.se>]

wiki_tomos skrev:

> 1) Authors have a right to use pseudonyms.

Correct.

> 2) A group of authors are free to use a shared pseudonym in certain
> cases.

Correct.

> 3) A shared pseudonym could reasonably be a project name when the
> works released are from the project.

Correct.

> 4) The wiki license draft is not substantively different in terms of
> its grants, restrictions, etc. It merely clarifies (and therefore
> reminds people) that they can use a shared pseudonym.

Correct.

> 5) The wiki license draft does not require authors to give up rights
> to attribution, it merely gives an explicit option for authors to
> exercise the right to use a pseudonym.

Correct.

> 6) Authors do not give up copyright altogether, either. For example,
> making a contribution to a wiki is not like creating a copyrightable
> work for a company as a part of employment. In the latter case, the
> copyright may all belong to the company, not the employer. In case of
> Wiki contribution using this type of CC-by license, authors remain
> authors and copyright holders.

Correct.

> 7) One consequence of 6) is that if I contribute my original writing
> to a wiki using this license, I can still later publish the same
> writing under my real name or other pseudonym that I choose, with the
> same or a different license terms. All of this is possible because I
> am the author of that piece.

Correct.

> 8) Another consequence of 6) is that the project team or a project
> leader cannot behave as if it/he is the author. Changing license terms
> is not possible without each contributors' permission, even though
> those contributors are all identified by the same pseudonym. Not
> complying with the CC-by license restrictions, etc. result in license
> termination, even if that is done by the project team or leader.
> Again, this is because each contributor remains to be an author &
> copyright holder.
>

Correct.

<>

CC-Wiki in it self doesn't contain any terms that mandates any waiver of 
attribution. It merely contains a way for a project to allow itself to 
become a pseudonym for the purpose of downstream attribution. The 
project must make a separate agreement between itself and its 
contributors in which the contributor gives the project permission to 
use a group pseudonym for the purposes of publishing the project under 
the CC-wiki license.

In this context it's worth pointing out that not all contributors to an 
open source/open content project contribute original works of 
authorship. Those that contribute labour - people that proofread, test, 
edit, does error corrections, etc - are not contributing any creative 
efforts (in the eyes of the law) and thus have no copyright stake in the 
project. They can only request attribution based on the terms of the 
license.

Nevertheless, if the project is located in an Author's right 
jurisdiction, care must be taken to make sure that the wording of this 
agreement comply with local copyright law. The agreement *may not* be 
worded so that it can be construed as a blanket-waiver of attribution. 
To avoid possible complaints, the project should also take care to duly 
attribute the contributors on the project website. If a contributor 
wishes to be anonymous that's ok, but it should be logged and saved for 
the future. If the contributer later wishes to be attributed you will 
have to comply...


/Peter Brink