Cc-uk mailing list

[Prodromos Tsiavos <prodromos.tsiavos AT socio-legal-studies.oxford.ac.uk>]

A few comments on various points raised the last couple of weeks:

A. Congradulations to the CC-SC for the launch event! I would also like to 
thank the CC-Scotland group and Jonathan in particular for all the 
contributions they have made (and are still making) to the drafting of the CC-
EW licences.  We have incoroporated all the suggestions made after consulting 
with the Berlin/ Stanford people regarding the compatibility issues with the 
other national iCC licences. We are also explicitly reserving moral rights 
following the same model as the CC- Scotland licences but we were reluctant 
to 
include new definitions as that would make the CC-EW licences have a differnt 
look and feel from the generic CC licences. The Berlin people were very keen 
into having the licences look as close to each other as possible. Jonathan, 
did 
you have any input from Berlin/ California regarding the extra definitions 
(e.g. Person, Use or Publish) in CC-SC?

B. Regarding the status of the CC-EW licences: we are done with the proof 
reading and now the final changes as discussed are included for the licences 
to 
be made available on the CC web site. 

C. In the process of porting the licences we identifed a number of issues 
that 
need to be addressed in a more international level. For instance, I still 
believe that there is an issue with the way moral rights are handled in 
different licences and the concept of ShareAlike and NonCommercial need to be 
clarified. The definition of the NonCommercial in particular is possibly the 
most sensitive element in the licences and it has been an issue of extensive 
debate with the BBC as well. 

D. Regarding the BBC licence: I have not seen any recent draft either. 
Hoewever, the main differences between CC-EW  and the BBC Creative Archive 
licence draft that we have lastly seen were three:
1. BBC-CA is a UK rather than worldwide licence 
2. The BBC-CA NonCommercial definition is narrower than that of the CC 
licences 
(e.g. it does not allow political use of the BBC CA licensed work or any 
indirect commercial benefit)
3. It contains an extra Licence Element, i.e. NonEndorsement stipulating that 
the BBC does not endorse any of the modified material as its own.
These different characteristics and particularly the first two make 
interoperability between classic CC licences and the BBC-CA licences very 
problematic as it has been already discussed in this list. This is why we 
removed the wording in clause 2.3 that allowed derivative works to be 
licensed 
under a BBC licence ("2.3. Each time You Publish a Derivative Work, You must 
offer to the recipient a licence to the Derivative Work which must be either 
one with the same terms and conditions as this Licence, or a later version of 
this Licence with the Licence Elements of this Licence, or another Creative 
Commons licence with the Licence Elements of this Licence, or the BBC 
Creative 
Archive general public licence."). This could cause serious compromises in 
the 
character of the licences and would essentially dilute the nature of the CC 
licences, as lots of people in the list have indicated in the past. Dual 
licensing seem to me the best option for the time being and hopefully BBC in 
the future will opt for a pure CC licence. Jonathan, how are you thinking of 
handling this issue in CC-SC?

E. It would be really great if a CC-NI was to be created. Does anyone in the 
list have any ideas about who would be an appropriate person in N. Ireland to 
contact? I was thinking of Professor Philip Leith but have not contacted him 
as 
yet. Once all the CC-UK licences are completed we should perhaps have some 
kind 
of event where we all get to meet each other in person ;-) Any ideas?

best
Prodromos


-----Opprinnelig melding----- 
Fra: Jonathan Mitchell [mailto:website3 AT jonathanmitchell.info] 
Sendt: ty 05.04.2005 00:03 
Til: Creative Commons UK 
Kopi: 
Emne: [Cc-uk] A number of updating drafting points


In answer first to David Illsley's points:
1. There is now a slightly-revised draft at
http://www.jonathanmitchell.info/cc/cc_sco_licence.html . This contains an
explicit statement that the moral rights are reserved; see comment.
(Incidentally, I'm sorry this is only on a private site, but there are
technical difficulties in updating the draft on the CC page at
http://creativecommons.org/worldwide/scotland .)
2. I take the point about the BBC licence (which would allow the BBC to
create a derivative work and put this out under its own licence), and on
looking at this I see that it doesn't seem to be quite clear what the BBC
licence actually is. Drafts on this mailing list were never finalised, and
there is no mention of the licence that I can find over the last year on the
BBC site. Does anybody know who in the BBC is dealing with this, and what
they are doing? I see one draft was authored by 'MatysR31' and 'Shelley
Bradley' is mentioned, but I have no contact info.

More generally, I see that the EW draft licences at
http://users.ox.ac.uk/~inet0009/creative_commons/ have been extensively
revised: are they in final form or still under revision?

Jonathan
--
Jonathan Mitchell QC

Work telephone/mobile: 0773 963 9343
Faculty internal mobile extension: 3349
Fax to laptop: 0870 124 8222
Business address: Advocates Library, Parliament House, Edinburgh EH1 1RF,
Scotland
DX ED 549302, Edinburgh 36; Legal Post LP3, Edinburgh 10

Website: http://www.jonathanmitchell.info

Home address: 30 Warriston Crescent, Edinburgh EH3 5LB, Scotland.
Home telephone: 0131 557 0854.

This message, and any attachments, may contain legally privileged material
and are confidential to the intended recipient.

Please note that my clerk is Iain Murray; tel. 0131 260 5697; fax 0131 220
2654; e-mail murraystable AT advocates.org.uk . Instructions as counsel should
unless otherwise notified be channelled via him.

_______________________________________________
Cc-uk mailing list
Cc-uk AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-uk