cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses
List archive
[cc-licenses] Thoughts on new wording RE collection societies etc.
- From: drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com>
- To: "Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts" <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: [cc-licenses] Thoughts on new wording RE collection societies etc.
- Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 15:40:00 -0500
I am not sure of the best way to word something like this so here is my first
take at it...
From: by-sa/3.0/us/legalcode:
e. For the avoidance of doubt, where the Work is a musical composition:
1. Performance Royalties Under Blanket Licenses. Licensor waives the
exclusive right to collect, whether individually or, in the event that
Licensor is a member of a performance rights society (e.g. ASCAP, BMI,
SESAC), via that society, royalties for the public performance or public
digital performance (e.g. webcast) of the Work.
2. Mechanical Rights and Statutory Royalties. Licensor waives the
exclusive
right to collect, whether individually or via a music rights agency or
designated agent (e.g. Harry Fox Agency), royalties for any phonorecord You
create from the Work ("cover version") and distribute, subject to the
compulsory license created by 17 USC Section 115 of the US Copyright Act (or
the equivalent in other jurisdictions).
f. Webcasting Rights and Statutory Royalties. For the avoidance of doubt,
where the Work is a sound recording, Licensor waives the exclusive right to
collect, whether individually or via a performance-rights society (e.g.
SoundExchange), royalties for the public digital performance (e.g. webcast)
of the Work, subject to the compulsory license created by 17 USC Section 114
of the US Copyright Act (or the equivalent in other jurisdictions).
and from: by-sa/3.0/legalcode:
e. For the avoidance of doubt:
1. Non-waivable Compulsory License Schemes. In those jurisdictions in
which
the right to collect royalties through any statutory or compulsory licensing
scheme cannot be waived, the Licensor reserves the exclusive right to collect
such royalties for any exercise by You of the rights granted under this
License;
2. Waivable Compulsory License Schemes. In those jurisdictions in which
the
right to collect royalties through any statutory or compulsory licensing
scheme can be waived, the Licensor waives the exclusive right to collect such
royalties for any exercise by You of the rights granted under this License;
and,
3. Voluntary License Schemes. The Licensor waives the right to collect
royalties, whether individually or, in the event that the Licensor is a
member of a collecting society that administers voluntary licensing schemes,
via that society, from any exercise by You of the rights granted under this
License.
OK, now I am not sure I have this right, but to the best I have been able to
determine with some initial digging here, even if I wave my rights, it will
not change the amount due by a radio station that has an agreement with PRS.
So what I was thinking was to include wording along the lines that I waive my
rights where I can except in cases where waiving them will not result in a
savings for the person making first / direct use of the work.
Let's say a business has an agreement with a collecting society where they
pay
X% of their gross to use any works they represent.
Let's say I have some BY-SA songs thet the collection society either directly
or indirectly collects royalties for.
Let's say this is in a country where I can waive my rights.
Given these circumstances, (Do they exist anywhere in the world? I think they
might here, but I am still checking.) my waiving my rights will not result in
any savings to the company playing my songs, say a radio station or a store,
and do I would not want them waived, even though I can.
Then it would be up to the companies in my country to negotiate deals with
the
collection society where they can take advantage of such waivers by me before
I would actually waive my rights for them.
Right now, I would be waiving them but they would still be being collected.
Not what I would want.
Is any of this clear to anyone? If so, can you think of a simpler way to
explain it all?
all the best,
drew
-
[cc-licenses] Thoughts on new wording RE collection societies etc.,
drew Roberts, 01/18/2008
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Thoughts on new wording RE collection societies etc.,
Gisle Hannemyr, 01/21/2008
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Thoughts on new wording RE collection societies etc.,
drew Roberts, 01/22/2008
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Thoughts on new wording RE collection societies etc.,
Paul Keller, 01/23/2008
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Thoughts on new wording RE collection societies etc.,
drew Roberts, 01/24/2008
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Thoughts on new wording RE collection societiesetc.,
Kevin Phillips (home), 01/24/2008
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Thoughts on new wording RE collection societiesetc.,
drew Roberts, 01/25/2008
- Re: [cc-licenses] Thoughts on new wording RE collectionsocietiesetc., Kevin Phillips (home), 01/27/2008
- Re: [cc-licenses] Thoughts on new wording RE collectionsocietiesetc., Mike Linksvayer, 01/28/2008
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Thoughts on new wording RE collection societiesetc.,
drew Roberts, 01/25/2008
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Thoughts on new wording RE collection societiesetc.,
Kevin Phillips (home), 01/24/2008
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Thoughts on new wording RE collection societies etc.,
Paul Keller, 01/25/2008
- Re: [cc-licenses] Thoughts on new wording RE collection societies etc., drew Roberts, 01/25/2008
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Thoughts on new wording RE collection societies etc.,
drew Roberts, 01/24/2008
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Thoughts on new wording RE collection societies etc.,
Paul Keller, 01/23/2008
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Thoughts on new wording RE collection societies etc.,
drew Roberts, 01/22/2008
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Thoughts on new wording RE collection societies etc.,
Gisle Hannemyr, 01/21/2008
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.