Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: [cc-licenses] Licence Upgrades

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Harlan Lieberman-Berg <sysadmin AT tacticalbusinesspartners.com>
  • To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] Licence Upgrades
  • Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 21:15:33 -0500

And now, I feel really smart

Thanks Tomos...

Harlan Lieberman-Berg


On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 10:50 +0900, wiki_tomos wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Do you see that the quoted part contains a phrase "a later version
> of this License"? That was the part I wanted to get your attention to.
>
> Tomos
>
> Harlan Lieberman-Berg wrote:
>
> >Well, I am not a lawyer as well, but I believe that the language which
> >you have quoted would explicitly DENY the rights to upgrade. After all,
> >it does say (e.g. Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Japan)." Which includes the
> >version number...
> >
> >Harlan Lieberman-Berg
> >
> >On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 07:30 +0900, wiki_tomos wrote:
> >> Terry might have something else in mind, but I can think of the
> >> language in CC-*-SA 2.0 and 2.5 (not 1.0)
> >>
> >> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/legalcode
> >>
> >> "4. Restrictions.The license granted in Section 3 above is
> >> expressly made subject to and limited by the following restrictions:"
> >>
> >> "b. You may distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or
> >> publicly digitally perform a Derivative Work only under the terms
> >> of this License, a later version of this License with the same License
> >> Elements as this License, or a Creative Commons iCommons license that
> >> contains the same License Elements as this License
> >> (e.g. Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Japan)."
> >>
> >> This language, according to many on this list, means that when you
> >> create a Derivative Work, you may choose to upgrade the license to a
> >> later version.
> >>
> >> Please note, that they are not lawyers as I understand, their opinions
> >> not
> >> legal advice, nor are they speaking to represent official opinion of
> >> the Creative Commons.
> >>
> >> Non-SA licenses do not have this type of language, as I remember.
> >> SA 1.0 licenses do not have it, either.
> >>
> >> Best Regards,
> >>
> >> Tomos
> _______________________________________________
> cc-licenses mailing list
> cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
>




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page