Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Francesco Poli <frx AT firenze.linux.it>]

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 10:44:01 -0500 James Grimmelmann wrote:

> Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
> > Please note, among some other (minor) differences, the important
> > word "effective"...
> 
> We are both right; you are quoting the unported version; I am quoting 
> the U.S. version.

Ouch!

[...]
> This actually raises a serious issue.  The differences in the first 
> clause are presumably traceable to the distinctive structure of the
> U.S.  Copyright Act, but I wonder about the difference in the presence
> of  "effective" and about the other seemingly cosmetic differences. 
> The  phrase "the right granted" in the U.S. version is awkward.  Are
> there  reasons for these divergences?

I welcomed the presence of the word "effective" in both the anti-DRM
clauses of the unported version (there is one in section 4a, and one in
section 4b) as an improvement.
Why the U.S. version does not have the same improvement?


P.S.: I'm only focusing on the unported license, because of lack of
      time...


-- 
But it is also tradition that times *must* and always
do change, my friend.   -- from _Coming to America_
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12  31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4

Attachment: pgpD94Ffr0aDK.pgp
Description: PGP signature