cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses
List archive
Re: [cc-licenses] reinstatement w/o too much value?
- From: Diane Peters <diane AT creativecommons.org>
- To: Development of Creative Commons licenses <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] reinstatement w/o too much value?
- Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2013 17:28:38 -0800
Hi John,
I suppose in theory it's conceivable that a licensee was never in compliance before they were in violation, but I have a hard time imaging that situation. Even if true, I don't think that's a reason to toss out the 30 day reinstatement provision -- retaining it doesn't break anything that I can see. Do you think otherwise? As for benefits, there has been a lot of discussion on this list about the benefits, particularly for institutional adopters who feel it important to have some mechanism that ensures they get their rights back after they've fixed a violation.
I think I agree that "automatically" should be moved down for the reason you state. We'll take a closer look at that as we wind up our hard proof. Thanks for catching that.
Diane
Diane M. Peters, CC General Counsel
http://creativecommons.org/staff#dianepeters
diane AT creativecommons.org
______________________________________
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.
diane AT creativecommons.org
______________________________________
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.
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 11:55 PM, John Hendrik Weitzmann <jhweitzmann AT mx.uni-saarland.de> wrote:
Hi all,
just a quick and late one: The automatic reinstatement of section 6a+b
as it is phrased now requires the licensee to be in full compliance at
least for a theoretical second. Otherwise there would be nothing to
REinstate, right?
There might not be a lot of practical value in this really, because
unintentional non-compliance usually happens from the start (classic:
Deficient attribution). Only some cases seem to actually remain for 6a,
like licensee at first merely distributes in a compliant way, then later
makes an adaptation and is not compliant anymore.
On the other hand, one wouldn't want to delete the requirement of at
least one compliant second, because that would in effect mean things
like "Hey, CCPL4 gives you 30 days free use even of NC content".
Thus, in the spirit of license simplicity it might be preferable to
cancel the whole automatic reinstatement provision of 6b.1.
Btw: "automatically" should in any case be moved one line down to 6b.1,
because "express reinstatement" as in 6b.2 can hardly qualify as
"automatic".
Best
John
_______________________________________________
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
-
[cc-licenses] reinstatement w/o too much value?,
John Hendrik Weitzmann, 11/05/2013
-
Re: [cc-licenses] reinstatement w/o too much value?,
Diane Peters, 11/08/2013
-
Re: [cc-licenses] reinstatement w/o too much value?,
John Hendrik Weitzmann, 11/09/2013
- Re: [cc-licenses] reinstatement w/o too much value?, Diane Peters, 11/09/2013
- Re: [cc-licenses] reinstatement w/o too much value?, jonathon, 11/09/2013
-
Re: [cc-licenses] reinstatement w/o too much value?,
John Hendrik Weitzmann, 11/09/2013
-
Re: [cc-licenses] reinstatement w/o too much value?,
Diane Peters, 11/08/2013
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.