Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Peter Brink <peter.brink AT brinkdata.se>]

wolfgang wander skrev:
> Furthermore it strikes me as odd that the time syncing of movies and
> sound invokes the derivative clause while the semantic syncing
> of photographs with text (in heavily modified: resized, recropped,
> desaturated) form does not.

That the syncing of movies and sound kicks of the copyleft part of the 
license has always seemed odd to me. There is no reason that is should. 
That one work is inspired by another does not make it a derivative work. 
I guess it has to do with a provision in the U.S. copyright act, there 
is certainly no such rule in the Swedish copyright act (or in any of the 
other Scandinavian countries either AFAIK).

Also there is, in my mind, no "semantic syncing" between text and 
pictures. In general one can remove either and the remaining part is 
unchanged, i.e. the two are really independent of each other.

Dependency is really only the case with adaptations and that is why the 
law treats adaptations as it does. To extend copyleft beyond adaptations 
would, IMHO, be a tragic mistake on the part of CC. Such a change would 
_decrease_ the users freedom to re-use. It would, for example, become 
impossible to use works with different licenses on the same webbpage or 
in the same publication.

/Peter Brink