Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-uk - Re: [Cc-uk] CC-UK drafting update

cc-uk AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Cc-uk mailing list

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Rob Myers <robmyers AT mac.com>
  • To: cc-uk <cc-uk AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [Cc-uk] CC-UK drafting update
  • Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 12:47:45 +0000

On Friday, December 03, 2004, at 07:54AM, Prodromos Tsiavos
<prodromos.tsiavos AT socio-legal-studies.oxford.ac.uk> wrote:

>The iCC has approved the draft that I am attaching and a final confirmation
>by
>the members of the Legal Advisory Board is expected by the 8th of December
>(this is the earliest date when the members of the LAB, the drafting team,
>iCC
>and the BBC are available for a phone conference).

Down to five very clear pages! I like the structure of 2.1, using HOWEVER and
FINALLY makes it very easy to follow logically.

>In relation to the issue of BBC CA- CC-UK compatibility, we are taking on
>board the comments posted in the list and we will NOT include any clauses
>that
>may cause the black-hole phenomenon.

That's great.

>For that purpose we are still trying to
>convince BBC to adopt the same Non-Commercial definition as the CC-UK

Is the BBC still concerned about institutional use? Can children in a school
(or students in a university) use the CA? If not then the CA are excluding
what is surely one of their main audiences. If they can, aren't schools
institutions? Indeed, aren't they *commercial* institutions in the age of PFI
deals?

>From what I've read on the US lists, the CC definition of NC is regarded as
>fairly restrictive, certainly more so than the provisions of the GPL* that
>cover being able to charge a price for distribution. If you played an NC
>single on a commercial radio station or even had advertisements on a site
>that you can download CC-NC songs from, current wisdom is that you'd be
>breaking NC.

Given how restrictive NC is anyway, whether a person or an institution is
using the material makes very little difference. And if institutions are
excluded, a number of individuals from the same institution could use the
work and release their changes very quickly to each other. I think it would
be a difficult and counter-productive requirement to enforce, and quite easy
to circumvent.

- Rob.

* - I know that the GPL isn't noncommercial, but it does regulate how costly
obtaining source material can be. It's this aspect that I'm using as a point
of comparison.




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page