Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: [cc-licenses] The FSF On FDL Derivatives

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "James Grimmelmann" <james AT grimmelmann.net>
  • To: "Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts" <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] The FSF On FDL Derivatives
  • Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 14:11:01 +0200

That post discusses both "modification" (possibly as defined in the
FDL) and "derivative" and it's not clear whether it's meant to talk
about one, to talk about both, or to assume that the two are the same.

James

On 5/9/07, rob AT robmyers.org <rob AT robmyers.org> wrote:
(I'm posting this here because of the recent debate about photography.)

The FSF have blogged about their interpretation of the scope of the FDL:

http://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/2007-05-08-fdl-scope

They support the position that Ben Mako Hill described, where use of
an image to illustrate a text creates a derivative. It's well worth a
read.

I was particularly interested by this statement:

"In cases like these where the materials complement each other, we
believe that the end result is a derivative work."

This contains two useful distinctions. The materials have been chosen
to complement each other to form a unit of presumably increased value
or greater use rather than just being aggregated. And *the end result*
is the derivative work, not the text or the photo, so legal causality
isn't broken.

What I am curious about is what exactly this "end result" is
(collective work, new multimedia work, or ...?) and how far-reaching
this effect is (particularly with regard to e.g. contextual
advertising).

- Rob.

_______________________________________________
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