Creative Commons Aotearoa New Zealand discussion

[Matt McGregor <Matt.McGregor AT royalsociety.org.nz>]

Hi Danyl, all,

For better or worse, this problem of 'misuse,' 'misrepresentation' & its many 
variants is often cited as a reason for adopting ND licences. If you're 
talking with licence users, it's often worth pointing out that CC licences 
don't affect moral rights. I suspect that many licence users don't know that 
moral rights exist, let alone that CC licences don't affect them. 

Second, the wonderfully clear CC-NZ licences 
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/nz/legalcode) state: 

"You must... not assert or imply any connection with sponsorship or 
endorsement by the Original Author or Licensor of You or Your use of the 
Work, without the separate, express prior written permission of the Original 
Author or Licensor."

They also state: "You must not.... falsely Attribute the Work to someone 
other than the Original Author." 

Cheers,
Matt

 
--
Matt McGregor   Creative Commons
DDI: +64 4 470 5779 | Twitter @cc_aotearoa<br>Creative Commons Aotearoa New 
Zealand is a project of the Royal Society of New Zealand
Royal Society of New Zealand | Te Aparangi
11 Turnbull Street, Thorndon | PO Box 598, Wellington 6140, New Zealand
www.creativecommons.org.nz

-----Original Message-----
From: cc-nz-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org 
[mailto:cc-nz-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Danyl Strype
Sent: Thursday, 13 June 2013 2:29 a.m.
To: Creative Commons Aotearoa New Zealand discussion
Subject: [Cc-nz] Through the Heart - Activist doco uses CC-BY-ND

Kia ora koutou

My partner drew my attention today to this documentary about Transmission 
Gully :
http://www.throughtheheart.co.nz/

Which doesn't use a NonCommercial clause (perhaps because they don't think it 
likely anyone will do better than cover costs selling copies), but does use a 
NoDerivatives clause. Perhaps they are concerned about people re-editing the 
doco to misrepresent them?

I'm not convinced allowing derivatives really creates that issue.
Assuming people respect the license in the first place, any derivative must 
acknowledge and link back to the original. This should make it clear that it 
is a derivative, and does not represent the original author. Free code 
software licenses deal with this by specifying that a person cannot claim 
credit for work derived from another project (Attribution), and cannot 
represent the derivative as the work of the original author. I guess the 
question is, do CC licences which allow derivatives include language to this 
effect?

Hei kōnā
Strypey

--
Danyl Strype
Community Developer
Disintermedia.net.nz/strype

"Geeks are those who partake in our culture."
- .ISOcrates

"Uncomfortable alliances are not just necessary; they reflect and speak to 
the tremendous possibility of our political moment."
- Harmony Goldberg and Joshua Kahn Russell
http://www.nationofchange.org/new-radical-alliances-new-era-1337004193

"Both Marxists and Chicago-school libertarian economists can agree that free 
software is the best model."
- Keith C Curtis
http://keithcu.com/wordpress/?page_id=407
_______________________________________________
cc-nz mailing list
cc-nz AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-nz
Creative Commons Aotearoa New Zealand
http://www.creativecommons.org.nz/