Kat Walsh | 7 Mar 02:29 2014

Re: [cc-devel] HTML validation of 4.0 licenses

Yes, official translations of the legal code will be available at URLs
following that scheme, as the deed translations are.

-Kat

On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 12:59 AM, Tarmo Toikkanen <tarmo.toikkanen@...> wrote:
> I have a question on showing license translations. Is there a direct URL for
> each translation, something like
>
> https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode.fi
>
> To mirror the convention for the deeds? Or how are the various translations
> to be accessed?
>
> --
> Tarmo Toikkanen
> tarmo@...
> http://tarmo.fi
>
> On Wednesday 5. 03 2014 at 2.38, Kat Walsh wrote:
>
> Corrected files are now up on our staging site and will replace the
> existing pages next Tuesday:
>
> http://staging.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
> http://staging.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode
> http://staging.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/legalcode
> http://staging.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/legalcode
> http://staging.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/legalcode
> http://staging.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode
(Continue reading)

Gisle Hannemyr | 12 Feb 13:11 2014
Picon
Picon

Translation of Exceptions and Limitations

CC 4.0 uses the following defintion of Exceptions and Limitations:

   *Exceptions and Limitations* means fair use, fair dealing,
   and/or any other exception or limitation to Copyright and
   Similar Rights that applies to Your use of the Licensed Material.

The concept of "fair use" is (AFAIK) specific to US copyright law
and has no equivalent in Norwegian copyright law.

The concept of "fair dealing" is (AFAIK) specific to British and
Commonwealth copyright law and also has no equivalent in Norwegian
copyright law.

As I understand it "fair use" and "fair dealing" are technical
terms, referring to explicit legislation.  However, if I used
some other English phrase  with a similar *everyday* meaning,
for instance "honourable application", it would probably *not*
be understood by many that I was talking explicitly about
exceptions and limitations to copyright.

When we worked on the CC 3.0 licenses, we were *porting* those.
This meant that we were allowed to use concepts from Norwegian
law, so in the ported version of the 3.0 licenses when term
"Fair Dealing Rights" was  replaced with "Lånereglene"
("Borrowing Rights"), which is what Exceptions and Limitations
to Copyright is collectively referred to in Norwegian legal
literature.

However, this time around, were not supposed to port the licenses,
but to do a "linguistic translations". And "references to specific
(Continue reading)

Kat Walsh | 3 Feb 23:04 2014

Revised ShareAlike Statement of Intent: comments open until 21 February

Summary: revised version of Statement of Intent posted. Comments open now,
and closed on the 21st of February, with specific prompt in this
message about including the last two items.

----

We have made a few revisions to the draft statement of intent for the
ShareAlike licenses in preparation to publish it in the next few
weeks. As described previously, this document will be a commitment by
Creative Commons to the characteristics of all future versions of the
ShareAlike licenses. The initial version was posted in November for
discussion.

As posted Nov. 15:
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/index.php?title=DRAFT_ShareAlike_Statement_of_Intent&oldid=95367

Previous cc-licenses post:
http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2013-November/007506.html

Comparison of old and new version in legible format:
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/images/3/39/ShareAlike_intent_changes.pdf

The document is substantially the same, but there are a few changes.
Some changes involve clarification of points that could otherwise have
been unclear or open to misinterpretation. Some of the changes include
mentioning the ported licenses: while we are seeking to minimize
porting of 4.0, the possibility is still open, both for 4.0 and for
potential future versions.

The final discussion period is beginning now--we intend to close
(Continue reading)

Tarmo Toikkanen | 30 Jan 09:51 2014
Picon

How are copyright notices marked on a CC license?

I’m unable to find a satisfying answer in the wiki, so I’m bothering the list.

The 4.0 version of the licenses, 3(a)1A says as follows:
===
retain the following if it is supplied by the Licensor with the Licensed Material:
identification of the creator(s) of the Licensed Material and any others designated to receive attribution, in any reasonable manner requested by the Licensor (including by pseudonym if designated);
a copyright notice;
a notice that refers to this Public License;
a notice that refers to the disclaimer of warranties;
a URI or hyperlink to the Licensed Material to the extent reasonably practicable;
===

The license chooser cannot be used to add
- the copyright notice
- disclaimer of warranties

So, if one would like to add those, how are they supposed to be added to RDFa, XMP, textual, and other representations of the license? Or are they just added as separate notices, somehow close to the actual published and licensed content? Best practices?

-- 
Tarmo Toikkanen
tarmo.toikkanen <at> aalto.fi
Learning Environments research group, http://legroup.aalto.fi
Creative Commons Finland, http://www.creativecommons.fi
Aalto university, http://www.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 | 8 Jan 01:37 2014

Plaintext versions of 4.0 posted

The plaintext versions of the 4.0 licenses are now up:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode.txt
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode.txt
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/legalcode.txt
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/legalcode.txt
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/legalcode.txt
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode.txt

Accompanying blog post:

http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/41127

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

Mitar | 3 Dec 13:12 2013
Picon

Rant about CC licenses

Hi!

Now after release of 4.0 I can rant a bit about CC licenses. Maybe
this has already been discussed in the past, sorry, but maybe it is
time to be discussed again.

I think we are all agree that CC licenses are a hack, a patch to the
broken copyright system. But I do not think that the patch goes in the
right direction.

CC licenses provide a range of choices for the users. Users can decide
to allow this or that, but the main issue of copyright they do not
address: the length of the copyright before it enters the public
domain. Isn't this the main issue we have about current copyright? Not
that copyright exists and what it protects, but that the protection
time is getting longer and longer. And CC licenses do not address this
at all. They play with some small permissions, sharing, remixing, just
toys. But not with the real thing: when does work enter public domain.

So I would propose that for 5.0 CC licenses introduce something new: a
time limit before work enters public domain. Currently there is only
one such license: CC-0 which says that the work enters public domain
immediately. Let's introduce CC-X, which would mean that work enters
public domain after X years. So somebody could license CC-1, CC-5,
CC-10, CC-50, whatever he or she wants. But the main point is that
after those X years, there is no "oh, I want a few years more, my work
is more successfully than I anticipated and I am rich now", you
licensed it, it is public domain. Yes!

This could also be mixed with other licenses, if you want. CC-BY-SA-5,
means for 5 years it is CC-BY-SA, but then it goes into public domain,
into CC-0. So every year, it gets one number less, countdown:
CC-BY-SA-4, CC-BY-SA-3, CC-BY-SA-2, CC-BY-SA-1, CC-0. Happy new year!
We have more CC works entering public domain. Isn't this the best
present ever?

And then we can open a discussion how long should the copyright
protection be. Then we can have a real data, statistics, how many
people decide for how long and how much this influence incentives and
creativity and public domain reuse. Then we will be able to have
arguments to change the copyright itself, not just be satisfied with
hacks and patches.

(There are of course more variations on the theme, but I think you got
the main idea.)

Mitar

--

-- 
http://mitar.tnode.com/
https://twitter.com/mitar_m
_______________________________________________
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

Diane Peters | 26 Nov 07:18 2013

4.0: It's here.

The 4.0 licenses are now live:  https://creativecommons.org/weblog/40768

The other links are:


Policy Decisions and Versioning Notes:  http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_4




More soon on compatibility especially.

Best,
Diane, Sarah, and Kat
_______________________________________________
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 | 14 Nov 19:28 2013

Draft statement of intent for ShareAlike licenses

This is a draft of a statement of intent for future versions of the
ShareAlike licenses:

http://wiki.creativecommons.org/DRAFT_ShareAlike_Statement_of_Intent

This is being posted for comment and discussion now; the comment
period will last until after the new year, which we expect to conclude
with a finalized version later in January.

Because of the new provision in the license that allows for SA
licensees to use SA works in Adapted Material under the conditions of
a later license, we will be publishing a statement of intent for these
licenses which will publicly commit to some elements that we intend to
keep constant in future versions. We hope that such a statement will
address some concerns raised about what may happen with future
versions of SA, and what it means for them as licensors.

Many of you are familiar with the existing statement of intent on the
scope of ShareAlike:
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC_Attribution-ShareAlike_Intent

This statement will not replace the existing document: it will be in
addition to the commitments made there.

A few important points:

* There are some things in this draft that we are proposing for
discussion, not because we expect them to meet with universal
agreement, and we hope that it will start discussion. It is unlikely
that the final document will have the same list of commitments.

* One issue for consideration is whether this should be a continuation
of the previous statement of intent, and combined with it, or a
separate document. Another is whether the commitments in this document
should apply to both the BY-SA and the BY-NC-SA licenses (some of the
previous commitments are obviously applicable to BY-SA only, but this
could be addressed).

* We expect this is an incomplete list. Some suggestions for
additional topics are already mentioned in the document; please
mention others that you think should be included.

Thanks for your thoughtful consideration; we look forward to engaging
in this discussion.

-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

Tarmo Toikkanen | 6 Nov 15:20 2013
Picon

Re: 4.0: misc changes and date for closing public iscussion

Finnish interpretation: Adaptations are private copies and cannot be shared publicly without permission (such as CC without ND). Giving a few (read: no more than 3) copies to members of your inner circle (family members, close friends) is allowed, nothing wider.

-- 
Tarmo Toikkanen
tarmo.toikkanen <at> aalto.fi
Learning Environments research group, http://legroup.aalto.fi
Creative Commons Finland, http://www.creativecommons.fi
Aalto university, http://www.aalto.fi

On Saturday 2. 11 2013 at 18.23, Anthony wrote:

On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 10:25 AM, Diane Peters <diane <at> creativecommons.org> wrote:
Yes, that's correct.  You can produce adaptations under the ND licenses, but you're not given permission to Share them.  Keep in mind that Sharing is only prohibited if permission to do so is required.

Well, it's not quite clear how that interacts with 17 USC 109 et. al.

Permission is generally *not* required to loan a copy of a book to a friend. Can I lend a copy of an adapted version of an ND work to a friend? What if I charge the friend? What if they're not friends, and I made 10,000 copies?
_______________________________________________

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

_______________________________________________
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
John Hendrik Weitzmann | 5 Nov 08:55 2013
Picon

reinstatement w/o too much value?

Hi all,

just a quick and late one: The automatic reinstatement of section 6a+b
as it is phrased now requires the licensee to be in full compliance at
least for a theoretical second. Otherwise there would be nothing to
REinstate, right?

There might not be a lot of practical value in this really, because
unintentional non-compliance usually happens from the start (classic:
Deficient attribution). Only some cases seem to actually remain for 6a,
like licensee at first merely distributes in a compliant way, then later
makes an adaptation and is not compliant anymore.

On the other hand, one wouldn't want to delete the requirement of at
least one compliant second, because that would in effect mean things
like "Hey, CCPL4 gives you 30 days free use even of NC content".

Thus, in the spirit of license simplicity it might be preferable to
cancel the whole automatic reinstatement provision of 6b.1.

Btw: "automatically" should in any case be moved one line down to 6b.1,
because "express reinstatement" as in 6b.2 can hardly qualify as
"automatic".

Best
John
_______________________________________________
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

Diane Peters | 2 Nov 15:30 2013

Conclusion of 4.0 Public Consultation

Hi everyone,

As mentioned earlier this week, we're closing off the public discussion on the 4.0 licenses at this point.  On behalf of CC, I want to thank everyone for the valuable input over this lengthy discussion process.  The licenses are much better because of it.

We will be spending the next few weeks conducting a hard proof of all six licenses and finishing up collateral such as updated FAQs and similar.  We'll update this list as we progress.  If all moves along as expected, we hope to turn on the new licenses by mid to late November.

Thanks again!

Diane
_______________________________________________
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