Development of Creative Commons licenses

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

On Monday 21 November 2005 06:23 pm, Daniel Carrera wrote:
> drew Roberts wrote:
> > My take is that unlees you have a license or some text somewhere
> > to the effect that the wav is under the same license, it would be
> > dangerous to assume that it is.
>
> I'm not assuming anything, and I'm not trying to get permission to
> distribute an album I just bought to more than 3 friends. I just think I
> hit an interesting question whose answer I don't know, and an important
> real-life scenario.

I did not intend to imply that you were assuming anything, just to point out 
that assuming may be dangerous.
>
> > Think of mp3 as low res and wav as high res and I think you would see why
> > someone might not want this "automaticly under the same license" idea to
> > fly.
>
> I have no doubt. But the question is whether the idea is correct.
>
> > You could even give a text file to party A with a CC BY-SA license and to
> > party B with an all rights reserved license. Party B might know about
> > party A's license, but unless they can get a copy from A or someone else
> > A has distributed to, they would not to my mind be able to pretend they
> > have the BY-SA licensed version. (Anyone see where I can be wrong in this
> > thought?)
>
> This depends on whether the license is attached to the *file* or the
> "work". And this is ultimatley the question I'm trying to ask.

Even if it is attached to the work, it would still also depend on if they 
were 
the same works. Or two seperate derivative works based upon the same source 
work.
>
> Cheers,
> Daniel.
all the best,

drew
-- 
http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=creator%3A%22drew%20Roberts%22