Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Diane Peters <diane AT creativecommons.org>]

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 9:41 PM, Gisle Hannemyr <gisle AT ifi.uio.no> wrote:

On 16.04.2012 14:38, zotz AT 100jamz.com wrote:

<snip>

 

At one point in this discussion, Diane Peters wrote:

  CC licenses, on the other hand, are non exclusive and can be used
  alongside other licensing models where those models so permit.
  For the most part, it's up to the creators to choose (or not)
  to participate in a collecting society that requires exclusivity.
  Ideally, we would like all creators to have the ability to choose
  our licenses if they think our licenses are right for them.  But
  there's nothing CC can do once exclusivity is the path chosen.

The above is correct.

However, the next sentence is not.

  No revision to the definition of NC itself or in the way CC
  licenses treat royalties can change the reality that where
  collecting societies take an exclusive assignment of rights,
  the creator is no longer able to use CC.

What this paragraph fails to recognise is that the creator does
not have to become a member of a collecting society to receive
payment for blanket license royalties.  And there is nothing that
prevents a *non-member* of a collecting society from using a
dual license.

Right, the sentence above only relates to situations where collecting societies demand membership and exclusivity, precluding use of CC licenses.  It is these situations that the CC pilots Paul and I have pointed to address, most recently SACEM, through careful negotiation with societies that preclude their members from using CC at all. 

In the case of the extended agreements in Nordic countries etc.,  explained below and where membership is not required as a condition of receiving royalties, I agree that is a difficult case and we need to consider.  Will lay atop more thoughts shortly, but good to see these situations in particular called out for further examination. 

This may sound like a weird thing to do.  However, in jurisdictions
with extended collective licenses, where Collecting Societies by
law are required to collect for non-members as well as members,
this *may* make sense (but currently, it does not - because the
CC contains a royalty-waiver clause which takes precedence over
any royalty-bearing license arrangement).

What I want is that the royalty-bearing licensee apply when the
licensee holds a *some* license that generates royalties, and
that the CC license should apply in all other cases.

The way I see it, it is up to CC to fix this.  My suggestion
is to say that *when* an extended collective license, or other
applicable blanket license, is held by the licensee, the right
to collect royalties is *not* waived by the Licensor. (But that
in the in the cases where the licensee does *not* hold an extended
collective license, or other applicable blanket license, the Work
is available for use under the CC public license.)

> Rob Myers wrote:
>> I can give you the right to freely use my work, or I can give the
>> collecting society the right to collect fees from everyone who uses my
>> work. I cannot do both at the same time...

Nobody is proposing that.

What is proposed is that I can give you the right to freely use my
work, *unless* you have entered into a blanket license agreement
with a collecting society.  Then I am entitled to my fair share of
whatever you pay the collecting society.

For avoidance of doubt: If you choose to *not* enter into a blanket
license agreement with a collecting society, you will have the right
to freely use my work.
--
- gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://folk.uio.no/gisle/ ]
========================================================================
   "Don't follow leaders // Watch the parkin' meters" - Bob Dylan

_______________________________________________
List info and archives at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
Unsubscribe at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/cc-licenses

In consideration of people subscribed to this list to participate
in the CC licenses http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0 development
process, please direct unrelated discussions to the cc-community list
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community

--
Diane M. Peters, General Counsel
Creative Commons
cell: +1 503-803-8338
skype:  peterspdx
email:diane AT creativecommons.org
http://creativecommons.org/staff#dianepeters

______________________________________

Please note: the contents of this email are not intended to be legal
advice nor should they be relied upon as, or represented to be legal
advice.  Creative Commons cannot and does not give legal advice. You
need to assess the suitability of Creative Commons tools for your
particular situation, which may include obtaining appropriate legal
advice from a licensed attorney.