Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Kent Mewhort <kmewhort AT cippic.ca>]

Thanks for your well thought-out responses, Diane. My concerns about the
new "Share" definition remain, as per my inline comments below:
>
> You comment provides a great opportunity to clarify an important
> dimension of the license.Section 2, not the definition of Share,
> contains the grant of rights to licensees, covering actions otherwise
> reserved to the Licensor, including distribution rights. “Share” on
> the other hand is the event that triggers the the license
> conditions.Said differently, only if the licensee both exercises the
> rights granted in Section 2 *and* shares the Licensed Work (or an
> Adaptation in licenses allowing their creation) does the licensee have
> to comply with the license conditions in Section 3.For those familiar
> with GPLv3, you can think of “Share” as the rough equivalent of
> “convey” in this regard.
>
> With that in mind, since Section 2 expressly grants the right to
> “distribute” the Licensed Work, is your concern addressed?
>
No, this is actually exactly what my concern entails: that the license
expressly grants the right to reproduce and distribute a work, but even
a broad exercise of these right does not necessarily trigger the
obligations under Section 3. I think the present definition of to
"Share" is too narrow.

For example, consider a scenario where I find and download and a
collection of songs licensed under CC-BY-SA. I put together a
compilation CD with these tracks, some without any changes and some that
I remix. I burn a few hundred copies and sell them. I don't think I
would have to provide any attribution whatsoever, or share it alike
under the same license.

I clearly implicate reproduction and distribution rights when I sell
these CDs, but not any of the rights listed under the definition of to
"Share". It's not a communication, as least as far as communication
rights are usually defined under copyright law. It's not making it
available "to the public", but rather it's a series of individual,
one-to-one commercial transactions.

The same could even apply to an online music download service in the
vein of iTunes: no attribution required, no share-alike required. Such a
download music service engages in a series on one-to-one, private
transactions; and, arguably, a download rather than a stream does not
implicate communication rights either.