Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Terry Hancock <hancock AT anansispaceworks.com>]

Sincaglia, Nicolas wrote:

> If one wants to license a work that is co-owned by multiple copyright
> holders, one only needs permission from one of the co-owners to license
> the work and negotiate the terms of the license. The licensee will need
> to pay royalties to all of the owners but requires only one owner's
> permission.
>  
Surely, you would need "controlling" interest in the work?

In, for example, real estate law, there is a concept of "controlling"
and "participating" interest in a property. I would imagine the
same concept to apply to non-real property (I mean it seems
logical -- but I don't know).

With business stocks ("common stock"?) you normally need
to have a majority share to be able to control the company. Of
course, there are also classes of stock that don't confer voting
power in the corporation (I think this is usually -- ironically -- called
"preferred stock"). (Not only am I not a lawyer, I'm also
not even slightly qualified in business finance, though).

Perhaps such agreements specifically confer licensing control
to the company?  That would mean that the company could take
it private, but if they make money selling it, you'd at least have to
be paid for your work.  Some people would probably be happy
with that, I suppose.

I would also imagine these kind of details to vary by jurisdiction!

> Obviously the co-owners could have an agreement between themselves that
> could limit each others ability to license the work without the others
> permission but as a licensee, this is not your concern.
>  
I think both the O.P. and I are both interested as potential
contributors/owners, not licensees.  (If you look at his sig, he's
from a university department -- I suspect he wants to set
licensing terms for published papers).

Cheers,
Terry

--
Terry Hancock (hancock AT AnansiSpaceworks.com)
Anansi Spaceworks http://www.AnansiSpaceworks.com