Cc-uk mailing list

[Cory Doctorow <cory AT eff.org>]

I think the existence of a right in Berne or elsewhere isn't 
necessarily grounds for its inclusion in a CC license. There are LOTS 
of things you're not allowed to do with a CC licensed work that aren't 
enumerated in the license (i.e., you're not allowed to use my work as 
part of your criminal enterprise). I think remaining silent on this 
score may be better than to call attention to them. If they must be 
enumerated, it would be better to enumerate them in an auctorial waiver 
of same (I, the author, surrender my moral rights) than an assertion.

The US's relationship with Berne is very uncomfortable and has always 
been incomplete -- first with the no-formalities requirement and then 
with the moral rights and other "author's rights."

On Jul 29, 2004, at 11:26 PM, Rob Myers wrote:

> On 29 Jul 2004, at 22:16, Rob Myers wrote:
>
> > > (e)     The honour and reputation 5D/5E provisions. We have already had
> > > problems with the Debian classification in relation to 5G and I am 
> > > sure we
> > > will have issues with these provisions as well. I will check how the 
> > > German
> > > License has dealt with this problem and get back to you.
> >
> > One thing I don't think I mentioned before is that as well as these 
> > being above and beyond the CC-2.0 requirements they can be used by 
> > mischievous or egotistical contributors to wreak havoc on users.
>
> But under the Berne convention authors have a right of Integrity as 
> well as paternity:
>
> Article 6bis of the Berne Convention recognizes the rights of 
> “attribution” and “integrity.” This provision states that an author 
> “shall have the right to claim authorship of the work [right of 
> attribution] and to object to any distortion, mutilation, or other 
> modification of, or other derogatory action in relation to, the said 
> work, which would be prejudicial to his honor or reputation [the right 
> of integrity]”*
>
> The US is a Berne signatory so it's curious CC-2.0 doesn't cover these 
> rights (unless I've missed something or it doesn't need to under US 
> law).
>
> Incidentally, all the other English-language iCommons licenses do seem 
> to be directy modified versions of the original US CC license.
>
> - Rob.
>
>
> * From http://aic.stanford.edu/jaic/articles/jaic36-02-006_3.html
> _______________________________________________
> Cc-uk mailing list
> Cc-uk AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-uk