Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Engel Nyst <engel.nyst AT gmail.com>]

On 07/29/2014 04:09 PM, Sarah Pearson wrote:
> Accordingly, most reusers who are concerned about doing the right
> thing are likely to attribute and/or ShareAlike where there is
> uncertainty.

How about reusers interested to make proprietary what is "left out" from
CC-BY-SA 4.0 scope when the original material is licensed to FAL? Does
share-alike vanish in the relicensing?


I think the problem is, magical relicensing is typically a dual-, tri-
licensing of the same work. This situation seems somewhat different,
because of the difference in rights being licensed, and I'd like to
understand exactly how, and with what consequences.


There are several (theoretical, maybe crazy) options: licensing to FAL
refers to the whole work, including databases; licensing to FAL refers
to the copyrighted work, leaving databases under CC-BY-SA 4.0 (give or
take some copyright in the "originality" of the assembly), or it cancels
CC-BY-SA in the adaptation and leaving databases unlicensed in the
distribution of adapted material. Is there another option?

Section 4(b) declares a combination of data Adapted Material. The
definition of Licensed Rights refers to Copyright and Similar Rights,
which are defined at their turn to /include/ Sui-Generis Database
Rights. The clause relicensing to FAL refers to Licensed Rights, so
includes database rights.

Looks like CC-BY-SA vanishes for database rights, and there's nothing at
the other end to replace them with.

Which is the intended interpretation and why?

--
"Excuse me, Professor Lessig, may I ask you to sign this CLA, so we can
*legally* have your permission to distribute your CC-licensed works?"