Cc-uk mailing list

[Edward Barrow <edward AT copyweb.co.uk>]

On Thursday 21 October 2004 00:28, Chris Adams wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Apologies for sounding naive/out of my depth here.
>
> I'm the editor of The Smoke, the student magazine at the University of
> Westminster, and I'm very, very interested in the development of the
> creative commons project.
>
> As part of the students union, much of our energy goes to campaigning
> on issues, and seeing as we have a very large creative school (music,
> film, new media etc.), I'm keen to feature the CC concept in an
> article, shift the magazine's own license to a more lax CC style
> license, and ultimately, talk the university into reviewing it's policy
> on students' creative property (right now, it's a bit hazy, but most
> lecturers and staff er towards "we own you, little undergrad -
> bwahahaha").

Unless it's *clearly* indicated to the contrary in an agreement signed by the 
student (possibly in university regulations which the student signs on 
enrolment) then the university has NO CLAIM on the copyright in students' 
work. If it's hazy, it's in students' favour. 

> I'm a media student, and I'm not au fait with copyright law,

Some serious shortcomings in the curriculum there I would say. 

> despite 
> reading lessig's books, we the media etc., and around other stuff
> around the subject.
>
> As the editor of the magazine, I'm liable for any legal slipups - what
> pitfalls should I be aware of if I'm thinking of moving to a more lax
> copyright license for the mag?

Get the appropriate rights from your contributors.  If you don't have a 
written licence or assignment from your contributors you are already skating 
on thin ice.

> Nearly all content is voluntary to the mag, so I don't feel right about
> indiscriminately locking away students' work in a big fat copyright
> license on the mag.

It's not yours to lock away in the first place, it's your contributors' 

> Also, how about adverts and such like? I've got this vision of
> copyright licenses like a kind of shrink wrapper for the whole mag,
> that locks everything inside it away behind the 'all rights reserved'
> tag.
>
> If I'm way off the mark, let me know.

Er... just a bit. A copyright licence *lets* the licensee do something, it 
doesn't lock anything. The lock is copyright, which subsists automatically in 
the work when it is written and belongs to the author (or, if the writing was 
part of the author's job, the author's employer). 

> I'm keen to learn, and prove that the licenses are viable commercially
> (well... at least pseudo-commercially: union media is partially
> subsidised).
Not least, by your unpaid contributors...


-- 
Edward Barrow
Copyright Consultant
edward AT copyweb.co.uk
***Important: see http://www.copyweb.co.uk/email.htm for important 
information 
about the legal status of this email