Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-nz - Re: [Cc-nz] Inappropriate CC licence??

cc-nz AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Creative Commons Aotearoa New Zealand discussion

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Matt McGregor <Matt.McGregor AT royalsociety.org.nz>
  • To: 'Creative Commons Aotearoa New Zealand discussion' <cc-nz AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [Cc-nz] Inappropriate CC licence??
  • Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 01:35:39 +0000

Hi Richard,

 

Great question! It’s certainly reasonably common practice in the sector. I have been having this conversation with people for a few months now, and there are a variety of positions. Holly and I (mostly Holly) have been doing some research on this, though I’d be very keen to get the expertise of folks of the list.

 

FYI, this question was asked a few years back in this very forum (thanks to Fi for the link): http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-nz/2008-May/000266.html

 

Cheers,

Matt

 

Matt McGregor Creative Commons

DDI: +64 4 470 5779 | Twitter @cc_aotearoa
Creative Commons Aotearoa New Zealand is a project of the Royal Society of New Zealand

Royal Society of New Zealand | Te Apārangi

11 Turnbull Street, Thorndon | PO Box 598, Wellington 6140, New Zealand
www.creativecommons.org.nz

 

From: cc-nz-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:cc-nz-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Richard White
Sent: Tuesday, 9 April 2013 12:50 p.m.
To: Creative Commons Aotearoa New Zealand discussion
Subject: [Cc-nz] Inappropriate CC licence??

 

Hi all,

 

Many of you will have read Matt’s blog post released this morning about Jem Yoshioka and her lovely work with CC and Public Domain materials fused with her own works.

 

I clicked on the link to go to the original Katherine Mansfield poem here, partly because I was curious about how the repository in question would indicate what rights were associated with the work.  This is related to questions we’ve been asking internally about some of our archival repositories at the University of Otago with quite old material.

 

The work in question – The Opal Dream Cave – was written in 1911 and Mansfield died in 1923, meaning it is now out of copyright, the author having died more than 50 years ago.  Therefore, is it appropriate for the repository in question to apply a CC BY-SA licence to the work when it is actually in the public domain?  In other words the licence applied is actually more restrictive in that it requires attribution and re-use under the same licence.

 

(It can be argued that a digital reproduction of something that is out-of-copyright attracts new copyright, even if this is merely a faithful reproduction of the original, because in NZ for a work to attract copyright it need not necessarily be original in any way, merely requiring effort and skill.  So the scan of the original on the same page could be said to be in copyright but on the page I linked to it’s just the text of the poem itself typed out).

 

I would welcome people’s thoughts on this.

 

Regards

Richard

 

 

Richard White | Subject Matter Expert, Student Management System Project & University Copyright Officer

Darwin House | 61 Clyde Street | University of Otago | Dunedin | New Zealand

Te Whare o Darwin | 61 Clyde Street | Te Whare Wānanga o Otago | Ōtepoti | Aotearoa

(03) (470) 3405 richard.white AT otago.ac.nz | rkawhite on Twitter | Copyright info for staff & students | Open Otago blog | LinkedIn

 

 

 




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page