Development of Creative Commons licenses

[shell_layer-creativecommons AT yahoo.com.au]

Hi, all.

I'd give the new language on derivative works the thumbs-up; that part has 
needed clarifying for a while (it probably should be mentioned on the Commons 
Deed).

However, a question arises: if you can only license a derivative under more 
restrictive terms, does that mean that you have to use a Creative Commons 
licence of some kind? A kind of within-Creative-Commons copyleft?

--- On Thu, 12/6/08, Jessica Coates <j2.coates AT qut.edu.au> wrote:

> From: Jessica Coates <j2.coates AT qut.edu.au>
> Subject: [cc-licenses] CCau v3.0 public launch
> To: "cci AT lists.ibiblio.org" <cci AT lists.ibiblio.org>, 
> "cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org" <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> Received: Thursday, 12 June, 2008, 5:44 PM
> Hi all (apologies for cross posts)
> 
> As some of you will have seen in the community list, CCau
> have just released our v3.0 licences for public
> consultation (http://creativecommons.org.au/v3draft). Or
> more specifically, we've released our BY
> (http://creativecommons.org.au/materials/BY_v3_Aus_June_08_draft.pdf)
> and BY-NC-SA
> (http://creativecommons.org.au/materials/BY_NC_SA_v3_Aus_June_08_draft.pdf)
> drafts.
> 
> We know this isn't the usual process for jurisdiction
> upgrades, but we thought that it was important in this
> case, because we wanted to know what the community thinks
> about some licensing decisions we've made. Which is why
> I'm writing separately to these two lists - obviously
> you guys are the experts on the CC licences, and so
> we'd love your opinions.
> 
> The two (potentially) controversial proposals we're
> going with in these drafts are:
> 
> - Rather than writing the licences as a straight
> jurisdiction translation from the Unported licences
> provided by CC International, we've decided to base
> them on the plain English licences produced last year by CC
> Aotearoa New Zealand, which they in turn based on the
> England and Wales licences. Not such a controversial idea,
> seeing it's been done before, but we thought it was a
> good time to seek feedback on this. Also, we've adapted
> the previous plain English licences substantially to align
> them more closely with the Unported licence. Let us know
> what you think of the drafts.
> 
> - More interestingly, we're also proposing to add some
> language to the BY and BY-NC licences that isn't in
> either the Unported or the previous plain English licences.
> The aim of this language is to clarify how derivative works
> that incorporate BY and BY-NC material can be licensed.
> This has been a problem in our implementation discussions
> with government, so we thought it might be a good idea to
> spell it out a bit more in the licences. The language
> we're proposing is based on discussion we had with Mia
> (yes that long ago!) and the licensing table on the CC FAQ
> page -
> http://wiki.creativecommons.org/FAQ#I_used_part_of_a_Creative_Commons-licensed_work.2C_which_Creative_Commons_license_can_I_relicense_my_work_under.3F
> Note that the new language is just a proposal - it
> isn't finalised yet. But we thought we'd highlight
> it now, in the lead up to the Legal Day in Sapporo, when
> we're hoping to get some discussion about it going.
> 
> We're keen to hear what people think about the drafts,
> and particularly the proposed derivative licensing
> language. Let us know what you think!
> 
> 
> Jessica Coates
> Project Manager
> Creative Commons Clinic
> Queensland University of Technology
> 
> ph: 07 3138 8301
> fax: 07 3138 9598
> email: j2.coates AT qut.edu.au
> _______________________________________________
> cc-licenses mailing list
> cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses


      Get the name you always wanted with the new y7mail email address.
www.yahoo7.com.au/mail