cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses
List archive
- From: Joachim Durchholz <jo AT durchholz.org>
- To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] Third-party licensing of works
- Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 00:05:11 +0200
Liz Berg schrieb:
WFMU wants to write up a contract that summarizes the by-nc or by-nc-nd licenses (also providing the URL for the full legalese version of the license), lists songs that the artists agrees to license under CC, and asserts that these songs will be included in WFMU's Free Music Archive website. Does this kind of agreement sound kosher? Or should we approach this in a different manner?
The artists will have to place the works under BY-NC resp. BY-NC-ND. That's enough so that everybody can download the works for free.
If WFMU is non-commercial as defined by the legalese in NC, then you shouldn't need any additional contracts.
If commercial entities are allowed to redistribute in a noncommercial fashion (I'm not sure whether the legal fine print allows this), then you wouldn't need additional contracts either.
However, if neither of these scenarios hold, you need to license the songs from the artists so that you're allowed to redistribute them. Should be a rather straightforward license though - you only need the license to distribute, you don't need the right to sublicense or anything because that's already covered by BY-NC resp. BY-NC-ND.
IANAL and just my 2c and anybody correct me if I'm wrong and all that.
Regards,
Jo
-
[cc-licenses] Third-party licensing of works,
Liz Berg, 06/29/2007
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Third-party licensing of works,
Joachim Durchholz, 06/29/2007
- Re: [cc-licenses] Third-party licensing of works, Terry Hancock, 06/29/2007
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Third-party licensing of works,
Joachim Durchholz, 06/29/2007
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.