Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-uk - Re: [Cc-uk] A draft for the weekend [5.01 rfc]

cc-uk AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Cc-uk mailing list

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Rob Myers <robmyers AT mac.com>
  • To: Prodromos Tsiavos <prodromos.tsiavos AT socio-legal-studies.oxford.ac.uk>
  • Cc: cc-uk AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [Cc-uk] A draft for the weekend [5.01 rfc]
  • Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 22:59:58 +0100

On 29 Oct 2004, at 12:04, Prodromos Tsiavos wrote:

(b) Waiving the integrity right: iCC is considering whether there should be
a separate IN (i.e. integrity) Licence Element. Our position in relation to the
CC-UK licences is to explicitly waive it for clarity and certainty reasons and
iCC seems to be fine with it, but the question of whether there should be an IN
Licence Element remains open. We are also interested in your comments on the
wording of the waiver clause.

If I'm deriving, I'm not the original author, so does that mean I'm not waiving? ;-)

The wording is a little intimidating, but I suppose it's not exactly a minor clause.

Is it worth making it clear that the licensor is waiving their moral rights for use of the work *through this license*, rather than generally? Is that possible? That would presumably make a difference if the licensor relicensed the work, which is likely for NC work.

(c) Regarding section 7.1.: It may not be possible to remove this clause
before CC takes such a decision for version 3.0 of the CC licences, but I will
raise the point with the iCC team.

Certainly CC-US aren't in any hurry to take it out, from what they've said on cc-license-discuss. It's not major, it just raises eyebrows.

I am looking forward for your comments (and the weekend to come) ;-)

Does sublicensing clash with being able to relicense the work under another compatible license, even if only conceptually? Or is this just common sense? :-)

0. What is a legally recognised person? Is this for companies that own copyrights?

1. What is a high-level license element? (I mean, I know what it is, but is it a common legal term?)

2.2 Nobody is worried about the CA license becoming a black hole for content? So if someone licenses some work in Japan under CC-BY-NC-JP, someone re-licenses that CC-BY-NC-UK here, and someone else combines that work with something from the creative archive, the original licensor can't then use the derived work back in Japan under the license they originally licensed their work under. The Japanese contributor obviously doesn't "lose" their original work, but they are denied downstream access to derived work. Is this fair?

2.3 Same terms and conditions or same license? (I know I've mentioned that before, just something that catches a layperson's eye).

- Rob.





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page