Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: [cc-licenses] Public Performance Clause & More ...

cc-licenses AT

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: azrael <azrael AT>
  • To: "Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts" <cc-licenses AT>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] Public Performance Clause & More ...
  • Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 13:39:50 +0100

Thanks James,

> (1) Does No commercial prevent someone using our methodology to create a
> piece of work for profit ? E.g. Can a paid forensic examiner work a client
> case according to our methodology and report it according to guidelines
> that
> we set if we use the "No commercial" section ...

Yes.  Copyright law itself doesn't reach far enough to stop them.
You're running up against the functionality problem; processes as such
aren't copyrightable, only descriptions of them.  Even a copyright in
the format isn't sufficient -- there's a 19th century case (Baker v.
Selden) that copyright in an accounting system won't stop someone else
from publishing a book of forms that "interoperate" with the system.

You'd need something more like patent protection, or perhaps trade
secret.  Trade secret is pretty much incompatible with using a CC
license, and with your goal of distributing the knowledge.

What your license will do is make sure that no one changes the
methodology as they distribute it far and wide, and also make sure that
no one distributing it will profit *from the distribution*.

Good, sorry, I didn't quite make it clear which side of the fence we were on on this one :-) The above result is what we were looking to obtain - protection of our work, but free use of the "benefits" from following it.

> (2) If the above happens ( either for profit or not ... ) and the acquired
> results are presented in court, would this qualify as a "public
> performance"
> of the work, and would it then be licensed under the same terms ? (
> Obviously this is an impossible legal position ... )

It would (I think) be a public performance, but because of the answer to
(1), there wouldn't be a licensing issue.  Note also that with a
BY-NC-ND license, there's no share-alike clause, so there'd be no
question about relicensing the in-court results under the same terms.
The reuse is either forbidden in the first place, or permissible and
whatever contributions the person using it made would be free and clear.

Can I ask for some further clarification on this please ? Does producing work from a methodology licensed through CC have no requisite to state that the resulting work was created using such a methodology ( other than good scientific citation ) ?

> (3) There are no issues with licensing a group work provided all
> contributors agree to the terms, am I correct in thinking that ? Or do we
> have to create some form of legal entity to license under ?

You are correct.  It's definitely a best practice to get that agreement
in writing and to document the specific contributions made by everyone.

Thank you, good advice I will heed well :-)



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page