Development of Creative Commons licenses

[wiki_tomos <wiki_tomos AT inter7.jp>]

Hi. 

>If we made it a condition of getting access to the NC works that a person 
>bring in and put on the system some other CC licensed work to build the 
>library, it looks like we would be closer to being cool. 

I understood this an idea that exchanging files is not "commercial," 
because of the specific statement in the license text. 
But I am concerned about the possibility that this applies only to 
the people who exchange files, not the service provider who let people 
to exchange files. 

In other words, it seems to me that people can freely exchange CC-by-nc 
files, but the company providing the software, network, and/or 
associated database with advertisement cannot claim their service 
provision is non-commercial. 

In your idea, it seems that the store would act as both file exchanger 
and a file-exchange service provider. So that question seems to remain 
- is the service provider part a non-profit operation?  

By the way, many of the audio files are available via the original 
author's web sites, I think. And I believe some of them are happy to 
give songs for free of charge for the project like yours. You can 
possibly contact the authors and obtain a different license, like 
a two tier license that grants your store to offer that service, 
and grants CC-by-nc license to everyone else. 

Best,

Tomos

----- Original Message -----
From: drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com>
To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts 
<cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 07:58:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Question about possible use of NC works



>On Sunday 10 April 2005 10:53 pm, wiki_tomos wrote:
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com>
>> To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts
>> <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org> Sent: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 16:15:58 -0400
>> Subject: Re: Question about possible use of NC works
>>
>> >I appreciate your thoughtful reply. So far, it is the only one. Here is
>> > the thing, if it is indeed this complex, and I fear it may be, the only
>> > safe thing I see to do is to leave all NC works out of the picture. Which
>> > is a shame, but when there is possible jail time and hugh statutory fines
>> > possible for copyright violations, it is not the time to take chances.
>>
>> Thank you for your kind words. Personally, I would do the same - leave
>> NC works altogether to avoid troubles. It might be different if there are
>> some legal precedents to rely on. I might feel a little more comfortable
>> to tell what's non-commercial then, and do something that I wouldn't
>> otherwise.
>
>I was just re-reading the license text to anwer another post and I had this 
>thought based on this portion of 4.b.
>
>"The exchange of the Work for other copyrighted works by means of digital 
>file-sharing or otherwise shall not be considered to be intended for or 
>directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation, 
>provided there is no payment of any monetary compensation in connection with 
>the exchange of copyrighted works."
>
>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/legalcode
>


>
>"provided there is no payment of any monetary compensation in connection 
>with 
>the exchange of copyrighted works."
>
>So, how could we get in/avoid trouble with this provision? (Assuming I am 
>right that the building the library idea is a valid one.)
>
>all the best,
>
>drew
>_______________________________________________
>cc-licenses mailing list
>cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
>