Kat Walsh | 19 Dec 02:46 2014

Scholarly resources on legal issues related to CC: your help wanted

We have a page up on the wiki for collecting resources related to CC licenses--their interpretation, enforceability, and surrounding legal ideas:

https://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC-related_legal_scholarship_and_references

There are only a very few up right now, just to start the page, as it's something we hope to build on with you. We'd welcome any additions!

(And yes, for those of you who have written some yourselves, we would love to have links to your papers here!)

Cheers,
Kat

--
Kat Walsh, Counsel, Creative Commons
IM/IRC/ <at> /etc: mindspillage * phone: please email first
Help us support the commons: https://creativecommons.net/donate/
California Registered In-House Counsel #801759
CC does not and cannot give legal advice. If you need legal advice, please consult your attorney.
_______________________________________________
List info and archives at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
Unsubscribe at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/cc-licenses

In consideration of people subscribed to this list to participate
in the CC licenses http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0 development
process, please direct unrelated discussions to the cc-community list
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
Sarah Pearson | 4 Oct 22:08 2014

closing public discussion period

Since July 22, we have been running a public discussion about compatibility between BY-SA 4.0 and the Free Art License 1.3 ("FAL"). Thanks very much to those of you who weighed in on and off list.

This email marks the closing of the public discussion period. We see no obstacles to compatibility after doing an internal analysis of the two licenses, and we have heard virtually no misgivings from the community. As such, we plan to formally announce compatibility with the FAL. Right now, we are preparing new FAQs and other explanatory materials to accompany the announcement. We also have created a wiki page explaining the key policy decisions made during the process. We plan to make the official announcement in mid-October.

Thanks again for your input and interest. We are excited to finally bridge the gap between these two important copyleft licenses.

best,
CC Legal
_______________________________________________
List info and archives at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
Unsubscribe at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/cc-licenses

In consideration of people subscribed to this list to participate
in the CC licenses http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0 development
process, please direct unrelated discussions to the cc-community list
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
Kat Walsh | 19 Sep 20:54 2014

NonCommercial interpretation page

During the 4.0 versioning process, we pledged to honor a long-standing
commitment to provide more information about the NC licenses.[1] The
legal team has written an information page:

https://wiki.creativecommons.org/NonCommercial_interpretation

While this page is currently public, it is open to additional revision and comment, particularly if there are important points missing or considerations we should address.

(If you are short on time, you have now read the most important part of
this email! If you would like more explanation and rationale, read on.)

1. About this document

We had published a first draft to staff only, which included examples
of NC and non-NC use cases--but after extensive feedback, we removed
them, because they created more questions than they resolved. Rather
than revising the examples to be indisputable, which is difficult when
individual situations may vary widely, we've emphasized principles and
considerations instead. (Some comments from our affiliates and others we asked for initial feedback led to additional clarifications.)

The considerations section is intended to be a practical guide to
points that potential licensors should be aware of before choosing the
NC license.

And though we know many people hoped for additional clarity here, we
are still steering clear of anything that appears to be clarifying the
definition. We've stated that the definition of NC is remaining
consistent across versions, with all of its gray areas, and are
avoiding additional text that would appear to change it; this document
is intended only to clarify the points on which consensus already
exists, not to change it.

2. Why this page now?

We chose to steward these licenses, not deprecate them, as a result of
a community and internal decision process made in parallel with the
4.0 process. General consensus is that we ought as steward provide
some support and education for how these licenses work even if we
recommend against their use for educational resources, scientific
publications, and similar.

We're aware of the discussions around the implementation of the
Collecting Society Directive in Europe, which mandates member states
implement legislation requiring collecting societies to allow their
members to license their works under "non commercial" terms.  We would
like to be sure national implementations are written broadly enough to
allow members to use our NC licenses as they stand.  In support of
that, it will be useful to be as clear as possible about what NC
allows and doesn't allow.

There are some principles enshrined in the definition and how the
licenses operate that are clear and not open for discussion--we need
to better articulate those lest misunderstandings fuel FUD or manifest
themselves adversely in court decisions and similar.  (E.g., the case
in Germany where a trial court concluded NC wasn't defined by our
licenses, resulting in a judge-made definition that is generally
considered a bad decision--currently on appeal.)

Our goals with this page are to alert would-be NC licensors about key
adoption considerations, in particular what NC doesn't enable, and
provide clarity on the fundamentals including how the licenses
operate. We'll be developing pages like this for the other license
elements subsequently (BY, SA, ND).

Thanks,
CC Legal

[1] See http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0/NonCommercial#Draft_2

--
Kat Walsh, Counsel, Creative Commons
IM/IRC/ <at> /etc: mindspillage * phone: please email first
Help us support the commons: https://creativecommons.net/donate/
California Registered In-House Counsel #801759
CC does not and cannot give legal advice. If you need legal advice, please consult your attorney.
_______________________________________________
List info and archives at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
Unsubscribe at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/cc-licenses

In consideration of people subscribed to this list to participate
in the CC licenses http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0 development
process, please direct unrelated discussions to the cc-community list
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
Sarah Pearson | 19 Sep 03:35 2014

FAL compatibility: concluding the process

Hi everyone,

Based on our analysis and the [limited] public conversation, we are strongly inclined to deem the Free Art License a "BY-SA Compatible License" per the criteria and process we published months ago. We see no major obstacles to compatibility in legal or practical terms, and we feel the two licenses are very similar in spirit and effect.

However, since the public discussion took place in July-August, we understand that many may not have been able to follow the conversation as closely as they would have otherwise. To give everyone the opportunity to provide input, we are keeping the discussion open until the end of September. Please take a look at the mailing list archives and the wiki analysis, and speak up on this list (or via private email if you prefer) if you have concerns or questions.

All the best,
CC Legal


_______________________________________________
List info and archives at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
Unsubscribe at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/cc-licenses

In consideration of people subscribed to this list to participate
in the CC licenses http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0 development
process, please direct unrelated discussions to the cc-community list
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
Sarah Pearson | 29 Jul 22:09 2014

input requested: FAL/BY-SA compatibility - license scope

This second discussion prompt relates to the differences in the scope of the two licenses.

The FAL licenses only copyright, though licensors are prohibited from using related rights to prevent exercise of the permissions granted by the license. BY-SA 4.0, on the other hand, licenses some rights beyond copyright, such as sui generis database rights and neighboring rights. Unlike the FAL, BY-SA requires compliance with its conditions (attribution, ShareAlike) even when those other rights, and not copyright, are implicated.

For compatibility purposes, when someone takes a BY-SA work, adapts it, and then applies the FAL, there is a possibility that a downstream user may not realize they need to attribute and ShareAlike when they share the work in a way that implicates only sui generis database or neighboring rights and not copyright. As a practical matter, however, we feel this is unlikely to be a major problem given that most reusers will either be unwilling or unable to discern when one type of right is implicated but not another closely related right. Accordingly, most reusers who are concerned about doing the right thing are likely to attribute and/or ShareAlike where there is uncertainty.

Thoughts? Your input would be much appreciated.

best,
Sarah


Sarah Hinchliff Pearson
Senior Counsel, Creative Commons
Get Creative Commons updates: http://bit.ly/commonsnews
______________________________


_______________________________________________
List info and archives at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
Unsubscribe at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/cc-licenses

In consideration of people subscribed to this list to participate
in the CC licenses http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0 development
process, please direct unrelated discussions to the cc-community list
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
Tarmo Toikkanen | 24 Jul 23:10 2014
Picon

Re: 4.0 translation worksheet discrepancies

Thanks for the clarifications, Kat!

While you're fixing the worksheet, and adding sentences that are not 
strictly license text, might I suggest you also add the strings that 
need to be inserted to the license texts when making the 6 variants? Now 
that they are not in the worksheet, we had to separately ask the 
translators to do those. It would be simpler to have everything in the 
worksheet.

Specifically, these are the missing strings:

BY and BY-NC:
- Insert 3(a)(4): “If You Share Adapted Material You produce, the 
Adapter's License
You apply must not prevent recipients of the Adapted Material from complying
with this Public License.”

BY-ND and BY-NC-ND:
- Insert “For the avoidance of doubt, You do not have permission under 
this Public
License to Share Adapted Material.” at the end of Section 3(a)(1)

BY-ND:
- Change Section 2(a)(1)(B) to “produce and reproduce, but not Share, 
Adapted
Material”
- Insert “, provided You do not Share Adapted Material” to Section 4(a)

BY-NC-ND:
- Change Section 2(a)(1)(B) to “produce and reproduce, but not Share, 
Adapted
Material for NonCommercial purposes only”
- Insert “and provided You do not Share Adapted Material” to Section 4(a)

Actually, to be on the safe side, it might be best to furnish the 
worksheet with full sentences of all alternatives. Meaning: Whenever a 
license variant calls for an "insert" or "change" or "remove", having 
all those different versions in the worksheet would make sure that the 
meanings are accurately translated. I can imagine that in quite a few 
languages, adding or removing a phrase might not be trivial, but require 
changes in the rest of the sentence.

On 24.7.2014 21.36, Kat Walsh wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Tarmo Toikkanen
> <tarmo.toikkanen@...> wrote:
>> On creating the xhtml version of the 4.0 suite translation, I've stumbled
>> onto the following discrepancies between the html text currently in the CC
>> BY-NC-SA 4.0 legal code html file and the translation worksheet:
>>
>> 1. Section "Considerations for the public", last sentence is "More
>> considerations for the public" in the legal code, while in the worksheet the
>> sentence is "More considerations for licensees". Which is correct?
> This is an error in the worksheet. "More considerations for the
> public" is the correct language.
>
>> 2. The worksheet is missing the H1 title "Creative Commons Legal Code".
>> Should it be translated?
>>
>> 3. The worksheet is missing the H3 title "Creative Commons
>> Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International Public License"
>> (although in most cases it's probably easy to build from the license
>> components).
> Thanks; we'll add these to the worksheet also.
>
>> 4. The worksheet is missing the "Additional languages available" bit, which
>> is in html <!-- comments currently. Should it be translated or not? If yes,
>> can we also fix the html invalidity problem, as the commented section
>> contains a <p> that is not closed? The section also contains an "<a name"
>> attribute, which is currently obsolete. What is your advise?
> It should be translated; we'll add this also. (It is currently
> commented-out in the English because it makes no sense to display it
> when there aren't any translations published yet.) Please do fix this
> in your final draft, including replacing the obsolete element; we'll
> add the corrections to the English also.
>
>> 5. "Back to Commons Deed" is in the html, but not in the worksheet. Should
>> it be translated?
> Yes, it should be.  (The worksheet is mainly to aid our reviewing, and
> since this is just navigational text we're not particular about how
> this is translated--but since it is confusing that it is not present,
> we will add it.)
>
> Thanks,
> Kat
>

--

-- 
Tarmo Toikkanen
researcher, tarmo.toikkanen@...
Learning Environments research group, http://legroup.aalto.fi
Creative Commons Finland, http://creativecommons.fi
Aalto University, http://aalto.fi

_______________________________________________
List info and archives at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
Unsubscribe at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/cc-licenses

In consideration of people subscribed to this list to participate
in the CC licenses http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0 development
process, please direct unrelated discussions to the cc-community list
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community

Sarah Pearson | 24 Jul 23:52 2014

input requested: FAL/BY-SA compatibility - attribution

As mentioned on this list, the Free Art License is currently under consideration for compatibility with CC BY-SA 4.0. We are seeking input from the community via several discussion prompts. This is the first and will address attribution.

If the FAL is deemed a compatible license, it means a reuser will be able to take a BY-SA work, adapt it, and then apply the FAL. Someone who receives the adapted material downstream must attribute the adapter and the original author, but they may attribute both authors in the manner dictated by the FAL.

The two licenses have slightly different attribution and marking requirements. The FAL has fewer total requirements than BY-SA, but it does have some requirements that are not included in BY-SA.

Specifically, the FAL requires:
  1. name of author(s),
  2. attach license to work or indicate where license can be found
  3. info on where to access the originals

(Sec 2.2)

It also requires that you indicate if you modified the work and note what type of modifications were made. (Sec 2.3)

Do you feel the FAL requirements will meet CC licensor expectations as to how they will be attributed by downstream users? Any and all input welcome.

best,
CC Legal
_______________________________________________
List info and archives at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
Unsubscribe at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/cc-licenses

In consideration of people subscribed to this list to participate
in the CC licenses http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0 development
process, please direct unrelated discussions to the cc-community list
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
Tarmo Toikkanen | 21 Jul 23:46 2014
Picon

4.0 translation worksheet discrepancies

On creating the xhtml version of the 4.0 suite translation, I've 
stumbled onto the following discrepancies between the html text 
currently in the CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 legal code html file and the 
translation worksheet:

1. Section "Considerations for the public", last sentence is "More 
considerations for the public" in the legal code, while in the worksheet 
the sentence is "More considerations for licensees". Which is correct?

2. The worksheet is missing the H1 title "Creative Commons Legal Code". 
Should it be translated?

3. The worksheet is missing the H3 title "Creative Commons 
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International Public License" 
(although in most cases it's probably easy to build from the license 
components).

4. The worksheet is missing the "Additional languages available" bit, 
which is in html <!-- comments currently. Should it be translated or 
not? If yes, can we also fix the html invalidity problem, as the 
commented section contains a <p> that is not closed? The section also 
contains an "<a name" attribute, which is currently obsolete. What is 
your advise?

5. "Back to Commons Deed" is in the html, but not in the worksheet. 
Should it be translated?

--

-- 
Tarmo Toikkanen
researcher, tarmo.toikkanen@...
Learning Environments research group, http://legroup.aalto.fi
Creative Commons Finland, http://creativecommons.fi
Aalto University, http://aalto.fi

_______________________________________________
List info and archives at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
Unsubscribe at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/cc-licenses

In consideration of people subscribed to this list to participate
in the CC licenses http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0 development
process, please direct unrelated discussions to the cc-community list
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community

Sarah Pearson | 22 Jul 15:05 2014

first compatibility candidate

Together with Copyleft Attitude, Creative Commons is happy to formally propose the Free Art License 1.3 as the first candidate for consideration under the ShareAlike compatibility process.

Per the compatibility process, we have published a wiki page dedicated to the FAL proposal. The page includes an initial comparison of the FAL and BY-SA 4.0.

Over the next several weeks, we will be seeking public input on this proposal. Look for specific discussion prompts on this list, but in the meantime, please feel free to chime in with general comments and reactions.

best,
CC Legal

_______________________________________________
List info and archives at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
Unsubscribe at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/cc-licenses

In consideration of people subscribed to this list to participate
in the CC licenses http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0 development
process, please direct unrelated discussions to the cc-community list
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
Tarmo Toikkanen | 21 Jul 07:01 2014
Picon

Minor typo in 4.0 suite translation instructions

Hi! We in CC Finland are proceeding along 4.0 translation.

In this pdf, which details how to make the 6 variants, there is a small 
discrepancy:

http://wiki.creativecommons.org/images/d/d1/Building_the_4.0_Suite.pdf

BY-ND: Insert “, provided You do not Share Adapted Material” to Section 4(a)
BY-NC-ND: Insert “and provided You do not Share Adapted Material” to 
Section 4(a)

Most likely these inserts should be identical for BY-ND and BY-NC-ND, 
but they have a one word/character difference. Best to fix, unless 
there's really a semantic difference between these two (which I doubt).

--

-- 
Tarmo Toikkanen
researcher, tarmo.toikkanen@...
Learning Environments research group, http://legroup.aalto.fi
Creative Commons Finland, http://creativecommons.fi
Aalto University, http://aalto.fi

_______________________________________________
List info and archives at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
Unsubscribe at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/cc-licenses

In consideration of people subscribed to this list to participate
in the CC licenses http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0 development
process, please direct unrelated discussions to the cc-community list
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community

Kat Walsh | 28 Jun 00:33 2014

CC0 French translation published

CC0 French is now published:

https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/legalcode.fr

https://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/42967

Congratulations to all of those who worked on this, particularly CC France!

Cheers,
Kat

--

-- 
Kat Walsh, Counsel, Creative Commons
IM/IRC/ <at> /etc: mindspillage * phone: please email first
Help us support the commons: https://creativecommons.net/donate/
California Registered In-House Counsel #801759
CC does not and cannot give legal advice. If you need legal advice,
please consult your attorney.
_______________________________________________
List info and archives at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
Unsubscribe at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/cc-licenses

In consideration of people subscribed to this list to participate
in the CC licenses http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0 development
process, please direct unrelated discussions to the cc-community list
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community


Gmane