Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: [cc-licenses] FW: [cc-community] Commercial Rights Reserved

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com>
  • To: Development of Creative Commons licenses <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] FW: [cc-community] Commercial Rights Reserved
  • Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 12:24:39 -0500

On Friday 14 December 2012 06:30:50 P-M wrote:
> > From: cc-licenses-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > [cc-licenses-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] on behalf of P. J. McDermott
> > [pjm AT nac.net] Sent: 14 December 2012 06:29
> > To: cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] [cc-community] Commercial Rights Reserved
> >
> > Forgive me if the beginning of this message sounds a bit off-topic; I do
> > get directly to the thread's topic by the end. :)
> >
> > On 2012-12-13 19:42, P-M wrote:
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> The point that is being made is that the work is released into a
> >> non-commercial commons. A commons where people aren't primarily
> >> exploiting the work of others for private gain. Commercial Rights
> >> Reserved is misleading as in many cases it is not weak commercialism
> >> that is being resisted but strong commercialism. So the use of a photo
> >> by a local community group in a publication from which they hope to
> >> raise a few quid is NOT the same as the use of the image by WALMART made
> >> into posters or greetings cards. Similarly a band playing a song in a
> >> club from which they get a cut of the door money is not the same as
> >> Toyota using the song in an advertisement.
> >
> > It seems to me that many people who want to resist such "strong
> > commercialism" are using the wrong license. I believe that CC BY-SA is
> > a more suitable choice for such goals.
>
> CC BY-SA does not do what you think it does for many works.
>
> > If Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. wants to license a photograph under the terms
> > of CC BY-SA for use in a greeting card, they'd have to offer to any
> > recipient of the card the same licensing terms for the entire card.
> > Similarly, to license from a musician a song under the terms of CC BY-SA
> > for use in an advertisement, Toyota Motor Corporation would have to
> > offer all viewers the same license to use the whole advertisement. In
> > both cases, an Adaptation is made.
>
> Simply printing an image onto a card does not make an adaption of the
> image. Simply including a song as part of an advertisment does not
> create an adapation of the song. Simply using the lyrics does not create
> an adaption of the lyrics. Simply reprinting a story does not create an
> adaption of the story. For many reuses no derivative rights are invoked,
> and the SA element is rendered inoperative.
>

Some of this does need to be addressed and I have been calling for that in
this round. That said, could you explain what you mean by:

> Simply including a song as part of an advertisment does not
> create an adapation of the song.

as if you mean what I think you do, I think you have that one wrong at least.

all the best,

drew




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page