Creative Commons - User contributions [en]

CC Friendly Lawyers

2012-02-18T14:56:58Z

Nagelstudio: /* United States */

<span style="color: red">Please note that CC does not provide referral services, and that we do not necessarily endorse or recommend anyone on this list for any particular client or circumstance.</span>

== Canada ==
* [http://artistslegaloutreach.ca/ Artists' Legal Outreach]

== United States ==

* '''Christine Creamer''' (New York, NY): [http://www.nagelstudio-harburg.com christine-creamer.com]
* [http://www.nagelstudiohamburg.net Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts]
* Withrow & Betinol Law (Los Angeles, CA): info@wibelaw.com. [http://www.nagelstudio-hamburg.net www.wibelaw.com]
* '''Tony Kullen''', KullenLaw LLC (Portland, OR & New York, NY) [http://www.kullenlaw.com/legal-services-for-creative-professionals/ KullenLaw for Creative Professionals]

Jurisdiction Database

2012-02-18T14:54:48Z

Nagelstudio: /* Research */

The Jurisdiction Database is a dynamic resource containing information for Affiliates, scholars and others interested in CC's international community.

==Research==
The Database contains the full text of the Unported and the jurisdiction-specific 3.0 licenses, which you can query by a range of variables. The license texts have been structured according to [[Property:Relevant_license_sections|tags or keywords]]. [[Special:RunQuery/Jurisdiction_Query|Query]] one or more ported licenses (and Unported) for tagged [http://reisenferien.blogpaint.com lincense sections].Visit the [[Jurisdiction_Database/Research|Jurisdiction Database Research]] page for more information on using the data contained in this [http://www.nagelstudio-hamburg.net database]. Please note that Creative Commons is not beginning any new ports in preparation for the upgrade to version 4.0.

==Jurisdictions==
The CC Affiliate Network consists of 100+ affiliates working in over 70 jurisdictions to support and promote CC activities around the world. Members of the Affiliate Network have formal agreements with Creative Commons. Enthusiasm for Creative Commons does not require a formal Affiliate Team. Creative Commoners around the world conduct events and share the news about CC without a formal relationship to Creative Commons. The flags below cover all jurisdictions included in the Jurisdiction Database, both members of the Affiliate Network and those who do not have formal agreements with CC. Click on the flags below to learn more about CC enthusiasts in these jurisdictions.

For more information on what it means to be a formal Affiliate, please see our [[International|Affiliates]] wiki page and our [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/images/9/94/Introduction_to_CC_and_Affiliate_Teams.pdf| Introduction document].

<div style="margin-left:50px;margin-right:50px; padding:10px;text-align:center;float:left;display:block;">
{{#ask: [[Category:Jurisdictions]]
|?Flag URL
|?Name
|sort=Name
|format=template|template=Jurisdiction List|link=none|limit=100}}
<div style="clear:both;display:none;"></div>
</div>

<div style="clear:both;"></div>
<center>
==Add a jurisdiction==
{{#forminput:form=Jurisdiction|size=30|button text=Add jurisdiction}}
</center>

==Contributing to the Database==
The Jurisdiction Database contains information on the Unported license and each Creative Commons affiliate jurisdiction (e.g. [[Germany]], [[Estonia]]).

On these pages you have the opportunity to add or edit data about the jurisdiction, or data about the jurisdiction's 3.0 license porting process.

On each page, you can choose to edit the page directly as with a normal wiki page or edit via the "edit with form" link at the top of the page. This form will allow you to input information into labeled boxes and is suggested at least for edits to the sidebar.

The structure of pages follows this schema: <Jurisdiction>/3.0/<License>
* Jurisdiction page (e.g. [http://lifestyle.blogpaint.com Germany], Estonia) which has the [[Template:Jurisdiction|template]] and [[Form:Jurisdiction|form]]
* 3.0 page which has [[Template:License|template]] and [[Form:License|form]].
*Specific license page (e.g. CC BY-NC-SA) which has [[Template:Ported License|templates]] and [[Template:License section]] and [[Form:Ported License|form]].

==Map==
{{#ask: [[Category:Jurisdictions]]|?Coordinates|format=openlayers|layers=osm,yahoo,bing,openlayers|height=350|limit=100}}

== Disclaimer ==
{{Infobox|This website provides information about legal topics and information on Creative Commons licenses. It is based on the work of Creative Commons and our Creative Commons Affiliate Teams. Nothing on this website is intended to be used as legal advice. Creative Commons and Creative Commons Affiliate Teams are not law firms and do not provide legal services. Using the Websites or Services or sending us an email does not create an attorney-client relationship. Creative Commons and Creative Commons Affiliate Teams provide this information on an "as-is" basis. Creative Commons makes no warranties regarding any information provided on this website and disclaims liability for damages resulting from their use.}}

__NOEDITSECTION__

[[Category:Database]]

License Versions

2012-02-16T20:13:11Z

Nagelstudio: /* International License Development Process */

This page identifies some of the improvements to the Creative Commons license suite from the publication of the first licenses in December, 2002, through the current version 3.0, and highlights important similarities among the major license versions released to date. For more information on using CC tools or works offered under Creative Commons licenses, consult the [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions Frequently Asked Questions page.] For a further historical perspective, you may also review defunct CC legal tools at the [http://creativecommons.org/retiredlicenses retired legal tools page].

==License blog posts==
The chart below presents the major license versions, their launch dates, and blog posts announcing public comment periods, the launch of a license suite, and changes to the new licenses. It does not reference the unfinished version 3.x ([http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3.01 3.01], [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3.5 3.5]) licenses, which are not in active discussion and are not expected to be published. Version 3.0 is the recommended and most recently-published Creative Commons license suite; the 3.x license discussions address further potential upgrades and changes that may (or may not) be considered when CC commences discussion on the next [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_4 version 4.0 license]. The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Legalcode_errata Legalcode Errata page], to which you should feel free to contribute, catalogs minor bugs in the licenses such as typographical errors.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! License version*
! Release date
! Call for public comment
! Launch announcement
! Explanation of changes from prior version
|-
| 1.0
| 2002 Dec 16
|
| [http://creativecommons.org/press-releases/entry/3476 Creative Commons Unveils Machine-Readable Copyright Licenses]
|
|-
| 2.0
| 2004 May 25
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3981 Versioning -- Public Review Begins]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 Announcing (and explaining) our new 2.0 licenses]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 Announcing (and explaining) our new 2.0 licenses]
|-
| 2.5
| 2005 June
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5447 Tweaking CC's Standard Attribution Language -- An Invitation to Comment]
|
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5457 Comments Period Drawing to a close for Draft License Version 2.5]
|-
| 3.0
| 2007 Feb 23
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/6017 Version 3.0 -- Public Discussion Launched]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/7249 Version 3.0 Launched]
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3 Creative Commons Version 3.0 Licenses -- A Brief Explanation]
|}

* Note that CC also released a version 2.1 suite for jurisdictions like Spain, Australia and Japan, whose localized ports of the 2.0 suite contained errors.

==International License Development Process==

Creative Commons develops, releases and updates its public copyright licenses (and other legal tools) via an open and inclusive process of engagement with Creative Commons’ global network of attorneys and affiliates, as well as varied communities and constituents, that includes the publication of drafts, formal comment periods and transparent decision-making. This process culminates in the publication of the preferred, most up-to-date set of CC licenses for use around the world. Creative Commons released its latest version of the licenses in February 2007. Those licenses are known as the 3.0 international (also called the 3.0 “unported” and formerly referred to under version 2.0 as the “generic”) license suite.

While each set of licenses produced by CC is drafted to conform with copyright law, many of the improvements to the version 3.0 license suite brought the licenses further into line with international copyright law. Once a suite of licenses is released, Creative Commons grants permission to legal experts around the world under formal agreement to adapt (or “port”) the licenses where necessary to more fully align the text with the laws of different legal jurisdictions and translate the licenses to the local language(s). See our [http://creativecommons.org/international international] page for more information or access the [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database jurisdiction database] to compare the international (unported) licenses and the ported licenses of various jurisdictions.

In each instance, the resulting ported licenses are intended to have the same legal meaning and effect as the international (unported) licenses and the ported licenses of other jurisdictions at the same license version. Porting follows the same open and inclusive processes used to produce the international licenses: publication of drafts, comment periods, engagement with communities and constituents who use the licenses, and transparent decision-making processes. It also involves close oversight and review by [http://www.nagelstudiohamburg.net CC staff].

==License Suite Versions==

The chart below and linked explanations that follow detail some of the improvements and important similarities among Creative Commons license versions. Some of the explanations contain links to further information on the topic.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! License Suite Version
! 1.0
! 2.0
! 2.5
! 3.0
|-
|'''All international (unported/generic) and ported licenses'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Nomenclature_.28for_unported_licenses.29 Nomenclature (for unported licenses)]
| Generic license
| Generic license
| Generic license
| International (unported) license
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Technical_Measures_by_Licensees_Prohibited Technological measures by users of CC licensed works prohibited]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Attribution_required Attribution required]
| Not all licenses
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Credit_to_others_contemplated Credit to others contemplated]
| No
| No
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Requests_for_removal_of_attribution_contemplated Requests for removal of attribution contemplated]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Collecting_societies_regimes_addressed Collecting societies regimes addressed]
| No
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Representations_and_warranties_by_licensor_included Representations and warranties by licensor included]
| Yes
| No
| No
| No
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#.22No_endorsement.22_clause_included "No endorsement" clause included]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Moral_rights_clause_included Moral rights clause included]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Adaptations_.28if_allowed.29_must_be_marked_as_such Adaptations (if allowed) must be marked as such]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Definition_of_.22NonCommercial.22_unchanged_.28same_in_all_versions.29 Definition of "NonCommercial" (has remained unchanged in all versions)]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Use_of_licenses_for_copyrightable_compilations_of_data_anticipated Use of licenses for copyrightable compilations of data anticipated]
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (explicit)
|-
| '''International (unported/generic) ShareAlike licenses'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Compatible_licenses_may_be_used_for_adaptations_of_works_originally_offered_under_CC_ShareAlike_licenses Compatible licenses may be used for adaptations of works originally offered under CC ShareAlike licenses]
| No
| CC only
| CC only
| Yes
|-
| '''Licenses ported to jurisdictions with sui generis rights'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Sui_generis_rights_in_databases_are_waived_for_uses_that_do_not_implicate_copyright Sui generis rights in databases are waived for uses that do not implicate copyright]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|}

==Nomenclature (for unported licenses)==

Before the launch of the version 3.0 licenses, the international (unported) licenses were called the “generic” licenses. The generic licenses were drafted to conform with U.S. law and conventions. Starting with version 3.0, Creative Commons [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#Further_Internationalization drafted its core suite of licenses to conform to relevant international treaties and drafting conventions]. In this sense, the version 3.0 international (unported) license suite is jurisdiction-agnostic: it does not mention nor is it drafted against any particular jurisdiction's laws or statutes, but rather it is intended to function without adjustment in all jurisdictions around the world. You may [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database access the jurisdiction database] and compare the international (unported) license to the ported licenses of various jurisdictions.

==Technical Measures by Licensees Prohibited==

All CC license versions prohibit licensees (as opposed to licensors) from using effective technological measures such as “digital rights management” software to restrict the ability of those who receive a CC licensed work from a licensee to exercise rights granted under the license. To be clear, encryption or an access limitation is not necessarily a technical protection measure prohibited by the licenses. For example, content sent via email and encrypted with the recipient's public key does not restrict use of the work by the recipient. Likewise, limiting recipients to a set of users (e.g., with a username and password) does not restrict use of the work by the recipients. In the cases above, encryption or an access limitation does not violate the prohibition on technological measures because the recipient is not prevented from exercising all rights granted by the license (including rights of further redistribution).

[http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#Debian This treatment was re-evaluated during the public process leading to release of the version 3.0 license suite.] CC considered arguments in favor of such measures, coupled with an obligation of parallel distribution. However, those arguments were ultimately rejected.

==Attribution required==
The version 1.0 suite is unique because it contains some CC licenses that do not require attribution. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 All subsequent license suites make attribution a standard requirement] unless the licensor specifies otherwise. The required mode of attribution differs slightly among the versions, and is progressively more flexible with each subsequent version.

==Credit to others contemplated==

Prior to the version 2.5 suite, CC licenses contemplated crediting the author only. Versions 2.5 and 3.0 [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5447 allow licensors to identify another party or organization for attribution], called the “Attribution Party.” This feature was introduced in part to alleviate burdensome or difficult attribution situations, such as may be the case when many people contribute to a wiki article or other multi-author, collaborative effort. In versions 2.5 and 3.0, licensors may designate another party for attribution purposes -- such as a sponsor institute, publishing entity or journal -- in addition to or instead of the author. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5457 You may review some of the concerns raised when CC proposed this change].

==Requests for removal of attribution contemplated==

All license versions after version 1.0 require attribution. However, legislation in many countries gives authors the right to control the use of their name in association with their works. Therefore, CC licenses require licensees to remove (otherwise required) attribution to the creator from collections or adaptations to the extent practicable at the creator’s request.

==Collecting societies regimes addressed==
Many users of Creative Commons licenses are also members of collective rights societies like ASCAP and BMI, which manage copyright on behalf of owners. Every version from the 2.0 suite onward contains clauses that account for the existence of those arrangements. They provide, for instance, that for works offered under a NonCommercial license, the licensor retains the right to collect royalties for commercial uses of the work. The [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 structure of the provisions in the 2.x licenses] (2.0, 2.1 and 2.5) differs from that in the version 3.0 licenses. The 2.x licenses specifically regulate music, sound recordings and webcasting. As those licenses were ported to different jurisdictions, those provisions were adjusted to conform to the local collecting society situation.
The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#International_Harmonization_.E2.80.94_Collecting_Societies version 3.0 licenses employ a broad, harmonized strategy to collective rights societies]. This strategy still allows jurisdictions to adopt an approach that best aligns with local law and society structure, but also ensures that the approach is implemented consistently across jurisdictions. In the international (unported) license, as regards compulsory royalty collection, the licensor reserves the right to collect those royalties in jurisdictions in which collection cannot be waived. In those jurisdictions in which compulsory royalty collection can be waived, the right to collect royalties is waived completely for those licenses that permit commercial use and reserved for commercial uses in those licenses that permit NonCommercial use only. For voluntary royalty schema, the licensor reserves the right to collect royalties for commercial uses in those licenses that permit NonCommercial use only, and completely waives the right to collect such royalties for licenses permitting commercial use. This clause covers both individual royalty collection and, in the event that the licensor is a member of a collecting society that collects such royalties, collection via such societies. Some affiliates porting the [http://fashionstylings.blogspot.com version 3.0] licenses to interface with local collective rights regimes have chosen to include only those clauses which address the particular situation in the jurisdiction. Others have adopted all the language from the international (unported) license in hopes of international [http://dieversicherungen.blogspot.com harmonization], or out of concern that their jurisdiction’s regime may change. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

==Representations and warranties by licensor included==

In the 1.0 license suite, the licensor extends warranties, for instance that the work does not infringe the work of another. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 These warranties were eliminated in all subsequent license versions.] All post-version 1.0 suites explicitly offer the work “AS IS” and disclaim all liabilities. Notwithstanding, some ports have included warranties where required under local law. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

=="No endorsement" clause included==

While attribution is required in all licenses post-version 1.0, a licensee may not provide credit in a way that suggests endorsement or sponsorship by the licensor. In some jurisdictions, wrongfully implying that an author, publisher or anyone else endorses a particular use of a work may be unlawful. While this has always been the case, [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#MIT the version 3.0 licenses for the first time explicitly prohibit endorsement or sponsorship without the consent of the licensor].

==Moral rights clause included==

While the existence and extent of moral rights differ by jurisdiction, the most consistently present rights are those of attribution and integrity (the right to prevent or halt the [http://nagelstudiohamburg.blogspot.com prejudicial use] of one’s work by another). The 1.0 and 2.x generic licenses were drafted to conform to U.S. law, and because U.S. law recognizes moral rights in only very limited circumstances, the generic versions of those licenses suites do not address moral rights of authors.

Reflecting the global, harmonized approach of the version 3.0 license suite, [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#International_Harmonization_.E2.80.93_Moral_Rights CC addressed the issue clearly in the international (unported) licenses]. Since moral rights are not waivable in most [http://goldneu.blogspot.com jurisdictions], CC did not include a waiver of those rights in the international licenses. Instead, the licenses specifically instruct users that they “must not distort, mutilate, modify or take other derogatory action in relation to the Work which would be prejudicial to the Original Author's honor or reputation.” This mandate forbids licensees from making uses that would otherwise violate authors’ moral rights of integrity. The attribution requirement is intended to satisfy the right of attribution. In the porting process, some jurisdictions slightly adjust this provision with CC’s permission to specify that moral rights are waived to the extent necessary to effect the license to the degree a waiver is possible under applicable law.[http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

==Adaptations (if allowed) must be marked as such==

Beginning with the 3.0 license suite, licenses that permit the creation of adaptations require licensees to take reasonable steps to label the work as such. For instance, the adaptation could include a notice to the effect that, “The original work has been modified.”

==Definition of "NonCommercial" unchanged (same in all versions)==
While Creative Commons’ licenses have evolved over time, the scope of permitted uses under the NonCommercial (“NC”) licenses has remained unchanged across all license suites. The [http://nagelstudio.blogage.de NonCommercial] clause prohibits the exercise of rights granted under the NC license “in any manner that is primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation.” Creative Commons carried out a [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/17127 study on the NonCommerical clause and users’ understandings]. However, the exact meaning of the clause is still debated.

==Use of licenses for copyrightable compilations of data anticipated==
Creative Commons licenses may be used with all copyrightable works (note that CC does not recommend its licenses for use with computer software). Such works include compilations of data that exhibit the requisite level of creativity for copyright protection under applicable national law. Thus, to the extent compilations of data are protected by copyright, Creative Commons licenses are suitable licenses for exercising that right. For the avoidance of doubt, version 3.0 licenses explicitly include such compilations in the definition of “work.”

==Compatible licenses may be used for adaptations of works originally offered under CC ShareAlike licenses==

Users of works licensed under CC’s ShareAlike licenses must make adaptations and collections of those works available under the same terms and conditions. The version 1.0 licenses require that the adaptations be distributed under exactly the same license as was applied to the original work. Starting with the release of the [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 2.x license suites, CC expanded compatibility] by allowing adaptations to be licensed under the same or later version of the original license, including other ported versions of the same or later-version of the license. The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#BY-SA_.E2.80.94_Compatibility_Structure_Introduced 3.0 Attribution-ShareAlike goes one step further], by allowing adaptations of works licensed under its terms to be licensed under a “Creative Commons Compatible License,” defined to mean licenses approved by CC as essentially equivalent to the 3.0 Attribution-ShareAlike license. To date, CC has not approved any other licenses. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/8213 You may also review CC’s statement of intent for ShareAlike licenses].

==Sui generis rights in databases are waived for uses that do not implicate copyright==

A few early (2.0, 2.5) European jurisdiction CC license ports licensed database rights along with copyright.

Although the generic and international (unported) license suites do not mention sui generis rights, starting with the version 3.0 licenses, CC established a [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/images/f/f6/V3_Database_Rights.pdf policy for how those rights are addressed in ported licenses in those jurisdictions where sui generis rights exist.] The policy provides that version [http://blogya.de/urlaubferien 3.0 EU jurisdiction] ports must license sui generis rights subject to the terms and conditions of the license just like copyrights and neighboring rights, but also must waive license requirements and prohibitions (attribution, share-alike, etc) for uses triggering database rights — so that if the use of a database published under a CC license implicated only database rights, but not copyright, the CC license requirements and prohibitions would not apply to that use. The license requirements and prohibitions, however, continue to apply to all uses triggering copyright. Other ports and the unported license are silent on database rights: databases and data are licensed (i.e., subject to restrictions detailed in the license) to the extent copyrightable, and if data in the database or the database itself are not copyrightable the license restrictions do not apply to those parts (though they still apply to the remainder). Thus, regardless of the [http://www.nagelstudio-harburg.com CC 3.0] license at play (unported, an EU port, another port), uses which implicate only database rights will not trigger the license conditions, while uses which implicate copyright will.
In addition, the policy precludes exportation of the sui generis rights to jurisdictions where such rights are not recognized through inclusion of a territoriality limitation, thereby avoiding the imposition of restrictions based on [http://www.nagelstudiohamburg.net sui generis rights] via contract where those rights are not enforceable or recognized. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

License Versions

2012-02-16T20:12:16Z

Nagelstudio: /* Sui generis rights in databases are waived for uses that do not implicate copyright */

This page identifies some of the improvements to the Creative Commons license suite from the publication of the first licenses in December, 2002, through the current version 3.0, and highlights important similarities among the major license versions released to date. For more information on using CC tools or works offered under Creative Commons licenses, consult the [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions Frequently Asked Questions page.] For a further historical perspective, you may also review defunct CC legal tools at the [http://creativecommons.org/retiredlicenses retired legal tools page].

==License blog posts==
The chart below presents the major license versions, their launch dates, and blog posts announcing public comment periods, the launch of a license suite, and changes to the new licenses. It does not reference the unfinished version 3.x ([http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3.01 3.01], [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3.5 3.5]) licenses, which are not in active discussion and are not expected to be published. Version 3.0 is the recommended and most recently-published Creative Commons license suite; the 3.x license discussions address further potential upgrades and changes that may (or may not) be considered when CC commences discussion on the next [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_4 version 4.0 license]. The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Legalcode_errata Legalcode Errata page], to which you should feel free to contribute, catalogs minor bugs in the licenses such as typographical errors.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! License version*
! Release date
! Call for public comment
! Launch announcement
! Explanation of changes from prior version
|-
| 1.0
| 2002 Dec 16
|
| [http://creativecommons.org/press-releases/entry/3476 Creative Commons Unveils Machine-Readable Copyright Licenses]
|
|-
| 2.0
| 2004 May 25
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3981 Versioning -- Public Review Begins]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 Announcing (and explaining) our new 2.0 licenses]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 Announcing (and explaining) our new 2.0 licenses]
|-
| 2.5
| 2005 June
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5447 Tweaking CC's Standard Attribution Language -- An Invitation to Comment]
|
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5457 Comments Period Drawing to a close for Draft License Version 2.5]
|-
| 3.0
| 2007 Feb 23
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/6017 Version 3.0 -- Public Discussion Launched]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/7249 Version 3.0 Launched]
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3 Creative Commons Version 3.0 Licenses -- A Brief Explanation]
|}

* Note that CC also released a version 2.1 suite for jurisdictions like Spain, Australia and Japan, whose localized ports of the 2.0 suite contained errors.

==International License Development Process==

Creative Commons develops, releases and updates its public copyright licenses (and other legal tools) via an open and inclusive process of engagement with Creative Commons’ global network of attorneys and affiliates, as well as varied communities and constituents, that includes the publication of drafts, formal comment periods and transparent decision-making. This process culminates in the publication of the preferred, most up-to-date set of CC licenses for use around the world. Creative Commons released its latest version of the licenses in February 2007. Those licenses are known as the 3.0 international (also called the 3.0 “unported” and formerly referred to under version 2.0 as the “generic”) license suite.

While each set of licenses produced by CC is drafted to conform with copyright law, many of the improvements to the version 3.0 license suite brought the licenses further into line with international copyright law. Once a suite of licenses is released, Creative Commons grants permission to legal experts around the world under formal agreement to adapt (or “port”) the licenses where necessary to more fully align the text with the laws of different legal jurisdictions and translate the licenses to the local language(s). See our [http://creativecommons.org/international international] page for more information or access the [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database jurisdiction database] to compare the international (unported) licenses and the ported licenses of various jurisdictions.

In each instance, the resulting ported licenses are intended to have the same legal meaning and effect as the international (unported) licenses and the ported licenses of other jurisdictions at the same license version. Porting follows the same open and inclusive processes used to produce the international licenses: publication of drafts, comment periods, engagement with communities and constituents who use the licenses, and transparent decision-making processes. It also involves close oversight and review by CC staff.

==License Suite Versions==

The chart below and linked explanations that follow detail some of the improvements and important similarities among Creative Commons license versions. Some of the explanations contain links to further information on the topic.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! License Suite Version
! 1.0
! 2.0
! 2.5
! 3.0
|-
|'''All international (unported/generic) and ported licenses'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Nomenclature_.28for_unported_licenses.29 Nomenclature (for unported licenses)]
| Generic license
| Generic license
| Generic license
| International (unported) license
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Technical_Measures_by_Licensees_Prohibited Technological measures by users of CC licensed works prohibited]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Attribution_required Attribution required]
| Not all licenses
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Credit_to_others_contemplated Credit to others contemplated]
| No
| No
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Requests_for_removal_of_attribution_contemplated Requests for removal of attribution contemplated]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Collecting_societies_regimes_addressed Collecting societies regimes addressed]
| No
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Representations_and_warranties_by_licensor_included Representations and warranties by licensor included]
| Yes
| No
| No
| No
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#.22No_endorsement.22_clause_included "No endorsement" clause included]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Moral_rights_clause_included Moral rights clause included]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Adaptations_.28if_allowed.29_must_be_marked_as_such Adaptations (if allowed) must be marked as such]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Definition_of_.22NonCommercial.22_unchanged_.28same_in_all_versions.29 Definition of "NonCommercial" (has remained unchanged in all versions)]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Use_of_licenses_for_copyrightable_compilations_of_data_anticipated Use of licenses for copyrightable compilations of data anticipated]
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (explicit)
|-
| '''International (unported/generic) ShareAlike licenses'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Compatible_licenses_may_be_used_for_adaptations_of_works_originally_offered_under_CC_ShareAlike_licenses Compatible licenses may be used for adaptations of works originally offered under CC ShareAlike licenses]
| No
| CC only
| CC only
| Yes
|-
| '''Licenses ported to jurisdictions with sui generis rights'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Sui_generis_rights_in_databases_are_waived_for_uses_that_do_not_implicate_copyright Sui generis rights in databases are waived for uses that do not implicate copyright]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|}

==Nomenclature (for unported licenses)==

Before the launch of the version 3.0 licenses, the international (unported) licenses were called the “generic” licenses. The generic licenses were drafted to conform with U.S. law and conventions. Starting with version 3.0, Creative Commons [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#Further_Internationalization drafted its core suite of licenses to conform to relevant international treaties and drafting conventions]. In this sense, the version 3.0 international (unported) license suite is jurisdiction-agnostic: it does not mention nor is it drafted against any particular jurisdiction's laws or statutes, but rather it is intended to function without adjustment in all jurisdictions around the world. You may [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database access the jurisdiction database] and compare the international (unported) license to the ported licenses of various jurisdictions.

==Technical Measures by Licensees Prohibited==

All CC license versions prohibit licensees (as opposed to licensors) from using effective technological measures such as “digital rights management” software to restrict the ability of those who receive a CC licensed work from a licensee to exercise rights granted under the license. To be clear, encryption or an access limitation is not necessarily a technical protection measure prohibited by the licenses. For example, content sent via email and encrypted with the recipient's public key does not restrict use of the work by the recipient. Likewise, limiting recipients to a set of users (e.g., with a username and password) does not restrict use of the work by the recipients. In the cases above, encryption or an access limitation does not violate the prohibition on technological measures because the recipient is not prevented from exercising all rights granted by the license (including rights of further redistribution).

[http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#Debian This treatment was re-evaluated during the public process leading to release of the version 3.0 license suite.] CC considered arguments in favor of such measures, coupled with an obligation of parallel distribution. However, those arguments were ultimately rejected.

==Attribution required==
The version 1.0 suite is unique because it contains some CC licenses that do not require attribution. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 All subsequent license suites make attribution a standard requirement] unless the licensor specifies otherwise. The required mode of attribution differs slightly among the versions, and is progressively more flexible with each subsequent version.

==Credit to others contemplated==

Prior to the version 2.5 suite, CC licenses contemplated crediting the author only. Versions 2.5 and 3.0 [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5447 allow licensors to identify another party or organization for attribution], called the “Attribution Party.” This feature was introduced in part to alleviate burdensome or difficult attribution situations, such as may be the case when many people contribute to a wiki article or other multi-author, collaborative effort. In versions 2.5 and 3.0, licensors may designate another party for attribution purposes -- such as a sponsor institute, publishing entity or journal -- in addition to or instead of the author. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5457 You may review some of the concerns raised when CC proposed this change].

==Requests for removal of attribution contemplated==

All license versions after version 1.0 require attribution. However, legislation in many countries gives authors the right to control the use of their name in association with their works. Therefore, CC licenses require licensees to remove (otherwise required) attribution to the creator from collections or adaptations to the extent practicable at the creator’s request.

==Collecting societies regimes addressed==
Many users of Creative Commons licenses are also members of collective rights societies like ASCAP and BMI, which manage copyright on behalf of owners. Every version from the 2.0 suite onward contains clauses that account for the existence of those arrangements. They provide, for instance, that for works offered under a NonCommercial license, the licensor retains the right to collect royalties for commercial uses of the work. The [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 structure of the provisions in the 2.x licenses] (2.0, 2.1 and 2.5) differs from that in the version 3.0 licenses. The 2.x licenses specifically regulate music, sound recordings and webcasting. As those licenses were ported to different jurisdictions, those provisions were adjusted to conform to the local collecting society situation.
The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#International_Harmonization_.E2.80.94_Collecting_Societies version 3.0 licenses employ a broad, harmonized strategy to collective rights societies]. This strategy still allows jurisdictions to adopt an approach that best aligns with local law and society structure, but also ensures that the approach is implemented consistently across jurisdictions. In the international (unported) license, as regards compulsory royalty collection, the licensor reserves the right to collect those royalties in jurisdictions in which collection cannot be waived. In those jurisdictions in which compulsory royalty collection can be waived, the right to collect royalties is waived completely for those licenses that permit commercial use and reserved for commercial uses in those licenses that permit NonCommercial use only. For voluntary royalty schema, the licensor reserves the right to collect royalties for commercial uses in those licenses that permit NonCommercial use only, and completely waives the right to collect such royalties for licenses permitting commercial use. This clause covers both individual royalty collection and, in the event that the licensor is a member of a collecting society that collects such royalties, collection via such societies. Some affiliates porting the [http://fashionstylings.blogspot.com version 3.0] licenses to interface with local collective rights regimes have chosen to include only those clauses which address the particular situation in the jurisdiction. Others have adopted all the language from the international (unported) license in hopes of international [http://dieversicherungen.blogspot.com harmonization], or out of concern that their jurisdiction’s regime may change. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

==Representations and warranties by licensor included==

In the 1.0 license suite, the licensor extends warranties, for instance that the work does not infringe the work of another. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 These warranties were eliminated in all subsequent license versions.] All post-version 1.0 suites explicitly offer the work “AS IS” and disclaim all liabilities. Notwithstanding, some ports have included warranties where required under local law. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

=="No endorsement" clause included==

While attribution is required in all licenses post-version 1.0, a licensee may not provide credit in a way that suggests endorsement or sponsorship by the licensor. In some jurisdictions, wrongfully implying that an author, publisher or anyone else endorses a particular use of a work may be unlawful. While this has always been the case, [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#MIT the version 3.0 licenses for the first time explicitly prohibit endorsement or sponsorship without the consent of the licensor].

==Moral rights clause included==

While the existence and extent of moral rights differ by jurisdiction, the most consistently present rights are those of attribution and integrity (the right to prevent or halt the [http://nagelstudiohamburg.blogspot.com prejudicial use] of one’s work by another). The 1.0 and 2.x generic licenses were drafted to conform to U.S. law, and because U.S. law recognizes moral rights in only very limited circumstances, the generic versions of those licenses suites do not address moral rights of authors.

Reflecting the global, harmonized approach of the version 3.0 license suite, [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#International_Harmonization_.E2.80.93_Moral_Rights CC addressed the issue clearly in the international (unported) licenses]. Since moral rights are not waivable in most [http://goldneu.blogspot.com jurisdictions], CC did not include a waiver of those rights in the international licenses. Instead, the licenses specifically instruct users that they “must not distort, mutilate, modify or take other derogatory action in relation to the Work which would be prejudicial to the Original Author's honor or reputation.” This mandate forbids licensees from making uses that would otherwise violate authors’ moral rights of integrity. The attribution requirement is intended to satisfy the right of attribution. In the porting process, some jurisdictions slightly adjust this provision with CC’s permission to specify that moral rights are waived to the extent necessary to effect the license to the degree a waiver is possible under applicable law.[http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

==Adaptations (if allowed) must be marked as such==

Beginning with the 3.0 license suite, licenses that permit the creation of adaptations require licensees to take reasonable steps to label the work as such. For instance, the adaptation could include a notice to the effect that, “The original work has been modified.”

==Definition of "NonCommercial" unchanged (same in all versions)==
While Creative Commons’ licenses have evolved over time, the scope of permitted uses under the NonCommercial (“NC”) licenses has remained unchanged across all license suites. The [http://nagelstudio.blogage.de NonCommercial] clause prohibits the exercise of rights granted under the NC license “in any manner that is primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation.” Creative Commons carried out a [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/17127 study on the NonCommerical clause and users’ understandings]. However, the exact meaning of the clause is still debated.

==Use of licenses for copyrightable compilations of data anticipated==
Creative Commons licenses may be used with all copyrightable works (note that CC does not recommend its licenses for use with computer software). Such works include compilations of data that exhibit the requisite level of creativity for copyright protection under applicable national law. Thus, to the extent compilations of data are protected by copyright, Creative Commons licenses are suitable licenses for exercising that right. For the avoidance of doubt, version 3.0 licenses explicitly include such compilations in the definition of “work.”

==Compatible licenses may be used for adaptations of works originally offered under CC ShareAlike licenses==

Users of works licensed under CC’s ShareAlike licenses must make adaptations and collections of those works available under the same terms and conditions. The version 1.0 licenses require that the adaptations be distributed under exactly the same license as was applied to the original work. Starting with the release of the [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 2.x license suites, CC expanded compatibility] by allowing adaptations to be licensed under the same or later version of the original license, including other ported versions of the same or later-version of the license. The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#BY-SA_.E2.80.94_Compatibility_Structure_Introduced 3.0 Attribution-ShareAlike goes one step further], by allowing adaptations of works licensed under its terms to be licensed under a “Creative Commons Compatible License,” defined to mean licenses approved by CC as essentially equivalent to the 3.0 Attribution-ShareAlike license. To date, CC has not approved any other licenses. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/8213 You may also review CC’s statement of intent for ShareAlike licenses].

==Sui generis rights in databases are waived for uses that do not implicate copyright==

A few early (2.0, 2.5) European jurisdiction CC license ports licensed database rights along with copyright.

Although the generic and international (unported) license suites do not mention sui generis rights, starting with the version 3.0 licenses, CC established a [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/images/f/f6/V3_Database_Rights.pdf policy for how those rights are addressed in ported licenses in those jurisdictions where sui generis rights exist.] The policy provides that version [http://blogya.de/urlaubferien 3.0 EU jurisdiction] ports must license sui generis rights subject to the terms and conditions of the license just like copyrights and neighboring rights, but also must waive license requirements and prohibitions (attribution, share-alike, etc) for uses triggering database rights — so that if the use of a database published under a CC license implicated only database rights, but not copyright, the CC license requirements and prohibitions would not apply to that use. The license requirements and prohibitions, however, continue to apply to all uses triggering copyright. Other ports and the unported license are silent on database rights: databases and data are licensed (i.e., subject to restrictions detailed in the license) to the extent copyrightable, and if data in the database or the database itself are not copyrightable the license restrictions do not apply to those parts (though they still apply to the remainder). Thus, regardless of the [http://www.nagelstudio-harburg.com CC 3.0] license at play (unported, an EU port, another port), uses which implicate only database rights will not trigger the license conditions, while uses which implicate copyright will.
In addition, the policy precludes exportation of the sui generis rights to jurisdictions where such rights are not recognized through inclusion of a territoriality limitation, thereby avoiding the imposition of restrictions based on [http://www.nagelstudiohamburg.net sui generis rights] via contract where those rights are not enforceable or recognized. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

License Versions

2012-02-16T14:26:51Z

Nagelstudio: /* Moral rights clause included */

This page identifies some of the improvements to the Creative Commons license suite from the publication of the first licenses in December, 2002, through the current version 3.0, and highlights important similarities among the major license versions released to date. For more information on using CC tools or works offered under Creative Commons licenses, consult the [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions Frequently Asked Questions page.] For a further historical perspective, you may also review defunct CC legal tools at the [http://creativecommons.org/retiredlicenses retired legal tools page].

==License blog posts==
The chart below presents the major license versions, their launch dates, and blog posts announcing public comment periods, the launch of a license suite, and changes to the new licenses. It does not reference the unfinished version 3.x ([http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3.01 3.01], [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3.5 3.5]) licenses, which are not in active discussion and are not expected to be published. Version 3.0 is the recommended and most recently-published Creative Commons license suite; the 3.x license discussions address further potential upgrades and changes that may (or may not) be considered when CC commences discussion on the next [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_4 version 4.0 license]. The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Legalcode_errata Legalcode Errata page], to which you should feel free to contribute, catalogs minor bugs in the licenses such as typographical errors.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! License version*
! Release date
! Call for public comment
! Launch announcement
! Explanation of changes from prior version
|-
| 1.0
| 2002 Dec 16
|
| [http://creativecommons.org/press-releases/entry/3476 Creative Commons Unveils Machine-Readable Copyright Licenses]
|
|-
| 2.0
| 2004 May 25
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3981 Versioning -- Public Review Begins]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 Announcing (and explaining) our new 2.0 licenses]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 Announcing (and explaining) our new 2.0 licenses]
|-
| 2.5
| 2005 June
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5447 Tweaking CC's Standard Attribution Language -- An Invitation to Comment]
|
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5457 Comments Period Drawing to a close for Draft License Version 2.5]
|-
| 3.0
| 2007 Feb 23
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/6017 Version 3.0 -- Public Discussion Launched]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/7249 Version 3.0 Launched]
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3 Creative Commons Version 3.0 Licenses -- A Brief Explanation]
|}

* Note that CC also released a version 2.1 suite for jurisdictions like Spain, Australia and Japan, whose localized ports of the 2.0 suite contained errors.

==International License Development Process==

Creative Commons develops, releases and updates its public copyright licenses (and other legal tools) via an open and inclusive process of engagement with Creative Commons’ global network of attorneys and affiliates, as well as varied communities and constituents, that includes the publication of drafts, formal comment periods and transparent decision-making. This process culminates in the publication of the preferred, most up-to-date set of CC licenses for use around the world. Creative Commons released its latest version of the licenses in February 2007. Those licenses are known as the 3.0 international (also called the 3.0 “unported” and formerly referred to under version 2.0 as the “generic”) license suite.

While each set of licenses produced by CC is drafted to conform with copyright law, many of the improvements to the version 3.0 license suite brought the licenses further into line with international copyright law. Once a suite of licenses is released, Creative Commons grants permission to legal experts around the world under formal agreement to adapt (or “port”) the licenses where necessary to more fully align the text with the laws of different legal jurisdictions and translate the licenses to the local language(s). See our [http://creativecommons.org/international international] page for more information or access the [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database jurisdiction database] to compare the international (unported) licenses and the ported licenses of various jurisdictions.

In each instance, the resulting ported licenses are intended to have the same legal meaning and effect as the international (unported) licenses and the ported licenses of other jurisdictions at the same license version. Porting follows the same open and inclusive processes used to produce the international licenses: publication of drafts, comment periods, engagement with communities and constituents who use the licenses, and transparent decision-making processes. It also involves close oversight and review by CC staff.

==License Suite Versions==

The chart below and linked explanations that follow detail some of the improvements and important similarities among Creative Commons license versions. Some of the explanations contain links to further information on the topic.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! License Suite Version
! 1.0
! 2.0
! 2.5
! 3.0
|-
|'''All international (unported/generic) and ported licenses'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Nomenclature_.28for_unported_licenses.29 Nomenclature (for unported licenses)]
| Generic license
| Generic license
| Generic license
| International (unported) license
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Technical_Measures_by_Licensees_Prohibited Technological measures by users of CC licensed works prohibited]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Attribution_required Attribution required]
| Not all licenses
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Credit_to_others_contemplated Credit to others contemplated]
| No
| No
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Requests_for_removal_of_attribution_contemplated Requests for removal of attribution contemplated]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Collecting_societies_regimes_addressed Collecting societies regimes addressed]
| No
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Representations_and_warranties_by_licensor_included Representations and warranties by licensor included]
| Yes
| No
| No
| No
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#.22No_endorsement.22_clause_included "No endorsement" clause included]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Moral_rights_clause_included Moral rights clause included]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Adaptations_.28if_allowed.29_must_be_marked_as_such Adaptations (if allowed) must be marked as such]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Definition_of_.22NonCommercial.22_unchanged_.28same_in_all_versions.29 Definition of "NonCommercial" (has remained unchanged in all versions)]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Use_of_licenses_for_copyrightable_compilations_of_data_anticipated Use of licenses for copyrightable compilations of data anticipated]
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (explicit)
|-
| '''International (unported/generic) ShareAlike licenses'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Compatible_licenses_may_be_used_for_adaptations_of_works_originally_offered_under_CC_ShareAlike_licenses Compatible licenses may be used for adaptations of works originally offered under CC ShareAlike licenses]
| No
| CC only
| CC only
| Yes
|-
| '''Licenses ported to jurisdictions with sui generis rights'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Sui_generis_rights_in_databases_are_waived_for_uses_that_do_not_implicate_copyright Sui generis rights in databases are waived for uses that do not implicate copyright]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|}

==Nomenclature (for unported licenses)==

Before the launch of the version 3.0 licenses, the international (unported) licenses were called the “generic” licenses. The generic licenses were drafted to conform with U.S. law and conventions. Starting with version 3.0, Creative Commons [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#Further_Internationalization drafted its core suite of licenses to conform to relevant international treaties and drafting conventions]. In this sense, the version 3.0 international (unported) license suite is jurisdiction-agnostic: it does not mention nor is it drafted against any particular jurisdiction's laws or statutes, but rather it is intended to function without adjustment in all jurisdictions around the world. You may [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database access the jurisdiction database] and compare the international (unported) license to the ported licenses of various jurisdictions.

==Technical Measures by Licensees Prohibited==

All CC license versions prohibit licensees (as opposed to licensors) from using effective technological measures such as “digital rights management” software to restrict the ability of those who receive a CC licensed work from a licensee to exercise rights granted under the license. To be clear, encryption or an access limitation is not necessarily a technical protection measure prohibited by the licenses. For example, content sent via email and encrypted with the recipient's public key does not restrict use of the work by the recipient. Likewise, limiting recipients to a set of users (e.g., with a username and password) does not restrict use of the work by the recipients. In the cases above, encryption or an access limitation does not violate the prohibition on technological measures because the recipient is not prevented from exercising all rights granted by the license (including rights of further redistribution).

[http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#Debian This treatment was re-evaluated during the public process leading to release of the version 3.0 license suite.] CC considered arguments in favor of such measures, coupled with an obligation of parallel distribution. However, those arguments were ultimately rejected.

==Attribution required==
The version 1.0 suite is unique because it contains some CC licenses that do not require attribution. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 All subsequent license suites make attribution a standard requirement] unless the licensor specifies otherwise. The required mode of attribution differs slightly among the versions, and is progressively more flexible with each subsequent version.

==Credit to others contemplated==

Prior to the version 2.5 suite, CC licenses contemplated crediting the author only. Versions 2.5 and 3.0 [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5447 allow licensors to identify another party or organization for attribution], called the “Attribution Party.” This feature was introduced in part to alleviate burdensome or difficult attribution situations, such as may be the case when many people contribute to a wiki article or other multi-author, collaborative effort. In versions 2.5 and 3.0, licensors may designate another party for attribution purposes -- such as a sponsor institute, publishing entity or journal -- in addition to or instead of the author. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5457 You may review some of the concerns raised when CC proposed this change].

==Requests for removal of attribution contemplated==

All license versions after version 1.0 require attribution. However, legislation in many countries gives authors the right to control the use of their name in association with their works. Therefore, CC licenses require licensees to remove (otherwise required) attribution to the creator from collections or adaptations to the extent practicable at the creator’s request.

==Collecting societies regimes addressed==
Many users of Creative Commons licenses are also members of collective rights societies like ASCAP and BMI, which manage copyright on behalf of owners. Every version from the 2.0 suite onward contains clauses that account for the existence of those arrangements. They provide, for instance, that for works offered under a NonCommercial license, the licensor retains the right to collect royalties for commercial uses of the work. The [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 structure of the provisions in the 2.x licenses] (2.0, 2.1 and 2.5) differs from that in the version 3.0 licenses. The 2.x licenses specifically regulate music, sound recordings and webcasting. As those licenses were ported to different jurisdictions, those provisions were adjusted to conform to the local collecting society situation.
The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#International_Harmonization_.E2.80.94_Collecting_Societies version 3.0 licenses employ a broad, harmonized strategy to collective rights societies]. This strategy still allows jurisdictions to adopt an approach that best aligns with local law and society structure, but also ensures that the approach is implemented consistently across jurisdictions. In the international (unported) license, as regards compulsory royalty collection, the licensor reserves the right to collect those royalties in jurisdictions in which collection cannot be waived. In those jurisdictions in which compulsory royalty collection can be waived, the right to collect royalties is waived completely for those licenses that permit commercial use and reserved for commercial uses in those licenses that permit NonCommercial use only. For voluntary royalty schema, the licensor reserves the right to collect royalties for commercial uses in those licenses that permit NonCommercial use only, and completely waives the right to collect such royalties for licenses permitting commercial use. This clause covers both individual royalty collection and, in the event that the licensor is a member of a collecting society that collects such royalties, collection via such societies. Some affiliates porting the [http://fashionstylings.blogspot.com version 3.0] licenses to interface with local collective rights regimes have chosen to include only those clauses which address the particular situation in the jurisdiction. Others have adopted all the language from the international (unported) license in hopes of international [http://dieversicherungen.blogspot.com harmonization], or out of concern that their jurisdiction’s regime may change. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

==Representations and warranties by licensor included==

In the 1.0 license suite, the licensor extends warranties, for instance that the work does not infringe the work of another. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 These warranties were eliminated in all subsequent license versions.] All post-version 1.0 suites explicitly offer the work “AS IS” and disclaim all liabilities. Notwithstanding, some ports have included warranties where required under local law. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

=="No endorsement" clause included==

While attribution is required in all licenses post-version 1.0, a licensee may not provide credit in a way that suggests endorsement or sponsorship by the licensor. In some jurisdictions, wrongfully implying that an author, publisher or anyone else endorses a particular use of a work may be unlawful. While this has always been the case, [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#MIT the version 3.0 licenses for the first time explicitly prohibit endorsement or sponsorship without the consent of the licensor].

==Moral rights clause included==

While the existence and extent of moral rights differ by jurisdiction, the most consistently present rights are those of attribution and integrity (the right to prevent or halt the [http://nagelstudiohamburg.blogspot.com prejudicial use] of one’s work by another). The 1.0 and 2.x generic licenses were drafted to conform to U.S. law, and because U.S. law recognizes moral rights in only very limited circumstances, the generic versions of those licenses suites do not address moral rights of authors.

Reflecting the global, harmonized approach of the version 3.0 license suite, [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#International_Harmonization_.E2.80.93_Moral_Rights CC addressed the issue clearly in the international (unported) licenses]. Since moral rights are not waivable in most [http://goldneu.blogspot.com jurisdictions], CC did not include a waiver of those rights in the international licenses. Instead, the licenses specifically instruct users that they “must not distort, mutilate, modify or take other derogatory action in relation to the Work which would be prejudicial to the Original Author's honor or reputation.” This mandate forbids licensees from making uses that would otherwise violate authors’ moral rights of integrity. The attribution requirement is intended to satisfy the right of attribution. In the porting process, some jurisdictions slightly adjust this provision with CC’s permission to specify that moral rights are waived to the extent necessary to effect the license to the degree a waiver is possible under applicable law.[http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

==Adaptations (if allowed) must be marked as such==

Beginning with the 3.0 license suite, licenses that permit the creation of adaptations require licensees to take reasonable steps to label the work as such. For instance, the adaptation could include a notice to the effect that, “The original work has been modified.”

==Definition of "NonCommercial" unchanged (same in all versions)==
While Creative Commons’ licenses have evolved over time, the scope of permitted uses under the NonCommercial (“NC”) licenses has remained unchanged across all license suites. The [http://nagelstudio.blogage.de NonCommercial] clause prohibits the exercise of rights granted under the NC license “in any manner that is primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation.” Creative Commons carried out a [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/17127 study on the NonCommerical clause and users’ understandings]. However, the exact meaning of the clause is still debated.

==Use of licenses for copyrightable compilations of data anticipated==
Creative Commons licenses may be used with all copyrightable works (note that CC does not recommend its licenses for use with computer software). Such works include compilations of data that exhibit the requisite level of creativity for copyright protection under applicable national law. Thus, to the extent compilations of data are protected by copyright, Creative Commons licenses are suitable licenses for exercising that right. For the avoidance of doubt, version 3.0 licenses explicitly include such compilations in the definition of “work.”

==Compatible licenses may be used for adaptations of works originally offered under CC ShareAlike licenses==

Users of works licensed under CC’s ShareAlike licenses must make adaptations and collections of those works available under the same terms and conditions. The version 1.0 licenses require that the adaptations be distributed under exactly the same license as was applied to the original work. Starting with the release of the [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 2.x license suites, CC expanded compatibility] by allowing adaptations to be licensed under the same or later version of the original license, including other ported versions of the same or later-version of the license. The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#BY-SA_.E2.80.94_Compatibility_Structure_Introduced 3.0 Attribution-ShareAlike goes one step further], by allowing adaptations of works licensed under its terms to be licensed under a “Creative Commons Compatible License,” defined to mean licenses approved by CC as essentially equivalent to the 3.0 Attribution-ShareAlike license. To date, CC has not approved any other licenses. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/8213 You may also review CC’s statement of intent for ShareAlike licenses].

==Sui generis rights in databases are waived for uses that do not implicate copyright==

A few early (2.0, 2.5) European jurisdiction CC license ports licensed database rights along with copyright.

Although the generic and international (unported) license suites do not mention sui generis rights, starting with the version 3.0 licenses, CC established a [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/images/f/f6/V3_Database_Rights.pdf policy for how those rights are addressed in ported licenses in those jurisdictions where sui generis rights exist.] The policy provides that version [http://blogya.de/urlaubferien 3.0 EU jurisdiction] ports must license sui generis rights subject to the terms and conditions of the license just like copyrights and neighboring rights, but also must waive license requirements and prohibitions (attribution, share-alike, etc) for uses triggering database rights — so that if the use of a database published under a CC license implicated only database rights, but not copyright, the CC license requirements and prohibitions would not apply to that use. The license requirements and prohibitions, however, continue to apply to all uses triggering copyright. Other ports and the unported license are silent on database rights: databases and data are licensed (i.e., subject to restrictions detailed in the license) to the extent copyrightable, and if data in the database or the database itself are not copyrightable the license restrictions do not apply to those parts (though they still apply to the remainder). Thus, regardless of the [http://www.nagelstudio-harburg.com CC 3.0] license at play (unported, an EU port, another port), uses which implicate only database rights will not trigger the license conditions, while uses which implicate copyright will.
In addition, the policy precludes exportation of the sui generis rights to jurisdictions where such rights are not recognized through inclusion of a territoriality limitation, thereby avoiding the imposition of restrictions based on sui generis rights via contract where those rights are not enforceable or recognized. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

License Versions

2012-02-16T14:24:47Z

Nagelstudio: /* Collecting societies regimes addressed */

This page identifies some of the improvements to the Creative Commons license suite from the publication of the first licenses in December, 2002, through the current version 3.0, and highlights important similarities among the major license versions released to date. For more information on using CC tools or works offered under Creative Commons licenses, consult the [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions Frequently Asked Questions page.] For a further historical perspective, you may also review defunct CC legal tools at the [http://creativecommons.org/retiredlicenses retired legal tools page].

==License blog posts==
The chart below presents the major license versions, their launch dates, and blog posts announcing public comment periods, the launch of a license suite, and changes to the new licenses. It does not reference the unfinished version 3.x ([http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3.01 3.01], [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3.5 3.5]) licenses, which are not in active discussion and are not expected to be published. Version 3.0 is the recommended and most recently-published Creative Commons license suite; the 3.x license discussions address further potential upgrades and changes that may (or may not) be considered when CC commences discussion on the next [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_4 version 4.0 license]. The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Legalcode_errata Legalcode Errata page], to which you should feel free to contribute, catalogs minor bugs in the licenses such as typographical errors.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! License version*
! Release date
! Call for public comment
! Launch announcement
! Explanation of changes from prior version
|-
| 1.0
| 2002 Dec 16
|
| [http://creativecommons.org/press-releases/entry/3476 Creative Commons Unveils Machine-Readable Copyright Licenses]
|
|-
| 2.0
| 2004 May 25
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3981 Versioning -- Public Review Begins]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 Announcing (and explaining) our new 2.0 licenses]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 Announcing (and explaining) our new 2.0 licenses]
|-
| 2.5
| 2005 June
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5447 Tweaking CC's Standard Attribution Language -- An Invitation to Comment]
|
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5457 Comments Period Drawing to a close for Draft License Version 2.5]
|-
| 3.0
| 2007 Feb 23
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/6017 Version 3.0 -- Public Discussion Launched]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/7249 Version 3.0 Launched]
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3 Creative Commons Version 3.0 Licenses -- A Brief Explanation]
|}

* Note that CC also released a version 2.1 suite for jurisdictions like Spain, Australia and Japan, whose localized ports of the 2.0 suite contained errors.

==International License Development Process==

Creative Commons develops, releases and updates its public copyright licenses (and other legal tools) via an open and inclusive process of engagement with Creative Commons’ global network of attorneys and affiliates, as well as varied communities and constituents, that includes the publication of drafts, formal comment periods and transparent decision-making. This process culminates in the publication of the preferred, most up-to-date set of CC licenses for use around the world. Creative Commons released its latest version of the licenses in February 2007. Those licenses are known as the 3.0 international (also called the 3.0 “unported” and formerly referred to under version 2.0 as the “generic”) license suite.

While each set of licenses produced by CC is drafted to conform with copyright law, many of the improvements to the version 3.0 license suite brought the licenses further into line with international copyright law. Once a suite of licenses is released, Creative Commons grants permission to legal experts around the world under formal agreement to adapt (or “port”) the licenses where necessary to more fully align the text with the laws of different legal jurisdictions and translate the licenses to the local language(s). See our [http://creativecommons.org/international international] page for more information or access the [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database jurisdiction database] to compare the international (unported) licenses and the ported licenses of various jurisdictions.

In each instance, the resulting ported licenses are intended to have the same legal meaning and effect as the international (unported) licenses and the ported licenses of other jurisdictions at the same license version. Porting follows the same open and inclusive processes used to produce the international licenses: publication of drafts, comment periods, engagement with communities and constituents who use the licenses, and transparent decision-making processes. It also involves close oversight and review by CC staff.

==License Suite Versions==

The chart below and linked explanations that follow detail some of the improvements and important similarities among Creative Commons license versions. Some of the explanations contain links to further information on the topic.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! License Suite Version
! 1.0
! 2.0
! 2.5
! 3.0
|-
|'''All international (unported/generic) and ported licenses'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Nomenclature_.28for_unported_licenses.29 Nomenclature (for unported licenses)]
| Generic license
| Generic license
| Generic license
| International (unported) license
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Technical_Measures_by_Licensees_Prohibited Technological measures by users of CC licensed works prohibited]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Attribution_required Attribution required]
| Not all licenses
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Credit_to_others_contemplated Credit to others contemplated]
| No
| No
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Requests_for_removal_of_attribution_contemplated Requests for removal of attribution contemplated]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Collecting_societies_regimes_addressed Collecting societies regimes addressed]
| No
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Representations_and_warranties_by_licensor_included Representations and warranties by licensor included]
| Yes
| No
| No
| No
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#.22No_endorsement.22_clause_included "No endorsement" clause included]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Moral_rights_clause_included Moral rights clause included]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Adaptations_.28if_allowed.29_must_be_marked_as_such Adaptations (if allowed) must be marked as such]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Definition_of_.22NonCommercial.22_unchanged_.28same_in_all_versions.29 Definition of "NonCommercial" (has remained unchanged in all versions)]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Use_of_licenses_for_copyrightable_compilations_of_data_anticipated Use of licenses for copyrightable compilations of data anticipated]
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (explicit)
|-
| '''International (unported/generic) ShareAlike licenses'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Compatible_licenses_may_be_used_for_adaptations_of_works_originally_offered_under_CC_ShareAlike_licenses Compatible licenses may be used for adaptations of works originally offered under CC ShareAlike licenses]
| No
| CC only
| CC only
| Yes
|-
| '''Licenses ported to jurisdictions with sui generis rights'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Sui_generis_rights_in_databases_are_waived_for_uses_that_do_not_implicate_copyright Sui generis rights in databases are waived for uses that do not implicate copyright]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|}

==Nomenclature (for unported licenses)==

Before the launch of the version 3.0 licenses, the international (unported) licenses were called the “generic” licenses. The generic licenses were drafted to conform with U.S. law and conventions. Starting with version 3.0, Creative Commons [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#Further_Internationalization drafted its core suite of licenses to conform to relevant international treaties and drafting conventions]. In this sense, the version 3.0 international (unported) license suite is jurisdiction-agnostic: it does not mention nor is it drafted against any particular jurisdiction's laws or statutes, but rather it is intended to function without adjustment in all jurisdictions around the world. You may [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database access the jurisdiction database] and compare the international (unported) license to the ported licenses of various jurisdictions.

==Technical Measures by Licensees Prohibited==

All CC license versions prohibit licensees (as opposed to licensors) from using effective technological measures such as “digital rights management” software to restrict the ability of those who receive a CC licensed work from a licensee to exercise rights granted under the license. To be clear, encryption or an access limitation is not necessarily a technical protection measure prohibited by the licenses. For example, content sent via email and encrypted with the recipient's public key does not restrict use of the work by the recipient. Likewise, limiting recipients to a set of users (e.g., with a username and password) does not restrict use of the work by the recipients. In the cases above, encryption or an access limitation does not violate the prohibition on technological measures because the recipient is not prevented from exercising all rights granted by the license (including rights of further redistribution).

[http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#Debian This treatment was re-evaluated during the public process leading to release of the version 3.0 license suite.] CC considered arguments in favor of such measures, coupled with an obligation of parallel distribution. However, those arguments were ultimately rejected.

==Attribution required==
The version 1.0 suite is unique because it contains some CC licenses that do not require attribution. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 All subsequent license suites make attribution a standard requirement] unless the licensor specifies otherwise. The required mode of attribution differs slightly among the versions, and is progressively more flexible with each subsequent version.

==Credit to others contemplated==

Prior to the version 2.5 suite, CC licenses contemplated crediting the author only. Versions 2.5 and 3.0 [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5447 allow licensors to identify another party or organization for attribution], called the “Attribution Party.” This feature was introduced in part to alleviate burdensome or difficult attribution situations, such as may be the case when many people contribute to a wiki article or other multi-author, collaborative effort. In versions 2.5 and 3.0, licensors may designate another party for attribution purposes -- such as a sponsor institute, publishing entity or journal -- in addition to or instead of the author. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5457 You may review some of the concerns raised when CC proposed this change].

==Requests for removal of attribution contemplated==

All license versions after version 1.0 require attribution. However, legislation in many countries gives authors the right to control the use of their name in association with their works. Therefore, CC licenses require licensees to remove (otherwise required) attribution to the creator from collections or adaptations to the extent practicable at the creator’s request.

==Collecting societies regimes addressed==
Many users of Creative Commons licenses are also members of collective rights societies like ASCAP and BMI, which manage copyright on behalf of owners. Every version from the 2.0 suite onward contains clauses that account for the existence of those arrangements. They provide, for instance, that for works offered under a NonCommercial license, the licensor retains the right to collect royalties for commercial uses of the work. The [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 structure of the provisions in the 2.x licenses] (2.0, 2.1 and 2.5) differs from that in the version 3.0 licenses. The 2.x licenses specifically regulate music, sound recordings and webcasting. As those licenses were ported to different jurisdictions, those provisions were adjusted to conform to the local collecting society situation.
The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#International_Harmonization_.E2.80.94_Collecting_Societies version 3.0 licenses employ a broad, harmonized strategy to collective rights societies]. This strategy still allows jurisdictions to adopt an approach that best aligns with local law and society structure, but also ensures that the approach is implemented consistently across jurisdictions. In the international (unported) license, as regards compulsory royalty collection, the licensor reserves the right to collect those royalties in jurisdictions in which collection cannot be waived. In those jurisdictions in which compulsory royalty collection can be waived, the right to collect royalties is waived completely for those licenses that permit commercial use and reserved for commercial uses in those licenses that permit NonCommercial use only. For voluntary royalty schema, the licensor reserves the right to collect royalties for commercial uses in those licenses that permit NonCommercial use only, and completely waives the right to collect such royalties for licenses permitting commercial use. This clause covers both individual royalty collection and, in the event that the licensor is a member of a collecting society that collects such royalties, collection via such societies. Some affiliates porting the [http://fashionstylings.blogspot.com version 3.0] licenses to interface with local collective rights regimes have chosen to include only those clauses which address the particular situation in the jurisdiction. Others have adopted all the language from the international (unported) license in hopes of international [http://dieversicherungen.blogspot.com harmonization], or out of concern that their jurisdiction’s regime may change. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

==Representations and warranties by licensor included==

In the 1.0 license suite, the licensor extends warranties, for instance that the work does not infringe the work of another. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 These warranties were eliminated in all subsequent license versions.] All post-version 1.0 suites explicitly offer the work “AS IS” and disclaim all liabilities. Notwithstanding, some ports have included warranties where required under local law. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

=="No endorsement" clause included==

While attribution is required in all licenses post-version 1.0, a licensee may not provide credit in a way that suggests endorsement or sponsorship by the licensor. In some jurisdictions, wrongfully implying that an author, publisher or anyone else endorses a particular use of a work may be unlawful. While this has always been the case, [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#MIT the version 3.0 licenses for the first time explicitly prohibit endorsement or sponsorship without the consent of the licensor].

==Moral rights clause included==

While the existence and extent of moral rights differ by jurisdiction, the most consistently present rights are those of attribution and integrity (the right to prevent or halt the prejudicial use of one’s work by another). The 1.0 and 2.x generic licenses were drafted to conform to U.S. law, and because U.S. law recognizes moral rights in only very limited circumstances, the generic versions of those licenses suites do not address moral rights of authors.

Reflecting the global, harmonized approach of the version 3.0 license suite, [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#International_Harmonization_.E2.80.93_Moral_Rights CC addressed the issue clearly in the international (unported) licenses]. Since moral rights are not waivable in most jurisdictions, CC did not include a waiver of those rights in the international licenses. Instead, the licenses specifically instruct users that they “must not distort, mutilate, modify or take other derogatory action in relation to the Work which would be prejudicial to the Original Author's honor or reputation.” This mandate forbids licensees from making uses that would otherwise violate authors’ moral rights of integrity. The attribution requirement is intended to satisfy the right of attribution. In the porting process, some jurisdictions slightly adjust this provision with CC’s permission to specify that moral rights are waived to the extent necessary to effect the license to the degree a waiver is possible under applicable law. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

==Adaptations (if allowed) must be marked as such==

Beginning with the 3.0 license suite, licenses that permit the creation of adaptations require licensees to take reasonable steps to label the work as such. For instance, the adaptation could include a notice to the effect that, “The original work has been modified.”

==Definition of "NonCommercial" unchanged (same in all versions)==
While Creative Commons’ licenses have evolved over time, the scope of permitted uses under the NonCommercial (“NC”) licenses has remained unchanged across all license suites. The [http://nagelstudio.blogage.de NonCommercial] clause prohibits the exercise of rights granted under the NC license “in any manner that is primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation.” Creative Commons carried out a [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/17127 study on the NonCommerical clause and users’ understandings]. However, the exact meaning of the clause is still debated.

==Use of licenses for copyrightable compilations of data anticipated==
Creative Commons licenses may be used with all copyrightable works (note that CC does not recommend its licenses for use with computer software). Such works include compilations of data that exhibit the requisite level of creativity for copyright protection under applicable national law. Thus, to the extent compilations of data are protected by copyright, Creative Commons licenses are suitable licenses for exercising that right. For the avoidance of doubt, version 3.0 licenses explicitly include such compilations in the definition of “work.”

==Compatible licenses may be used for adaptations of works originally offered under CC ShareAlike licenses==

Users of works licensed under CC’s ShareAlike licenses must make adaptations and collections of those works available under the same terms and conditions. The version 1.0 licenses require that the adaptations be distributed under exactly the same license as was applied to the original work. Starting with the release of the [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 2.x license suites, CC expanded compatibility] by allowing adaptations to be licensed under the same or later version of the original license, including other ported versions of the same or later-version of the license. The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#BY-SA_.E2.80.94_Compatibility_Structure_Introduced 3.0 Attribution-ShareAlike goes one step further], by allowing adaptations of works licensed under its terms to be licensed under a “Creative Commons Compatible License,” defined to mean licenses approved by CC as essentially equivalent to the 3.0 Attribution-ShareAlike license. To date, CC has not approved any other licenses. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/8213 You may also review CC’s statement of intent for ShareAlike licenses].

==Sui generis rights in databases are waived for uses that do not implicate copyright==

A few early (2.0, 2.5) European jurisdiction CC license ports licensed database rights along with copyright.

Although the generic and international (unported) license suites do not mention sui generis rights, starting with the version 3.0 licenses, CC established a [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/images/f/f6/V3_Database_Rights.pdf policy for how those rights are addressed in ported licenses in those jurisdictions where sui generis rights exist.] The policy provides that version [http://blogya.de/urlaubferien 3.0 EU jurisdiction] ports must license sui generis rights subject to the terms and conditions of the license just like copyrights and neighboring rights, but also must waive license requirements and prohibitions (attribution, share-alike, etc) for uses triggering database rights — so that if the use of a database published under a CC license implicated only database rights, but not copyright, the CC license requirements and prohibitions would not apply to that use. The license requirements and prohibitions, however, continue to apply to all uses triggering copyright. Other ports and the unported license are silent on database rights: databases and data are licensed (i.e., subject to restrictions detailed in the license) to the extent copyrightable, and if data in the database or the database itself are not copyrightable the license restrictions do not apply to those parts (though they still apply to the remainder). Thus, regardless of the [http://www.nagelstudio-harburg.com CC 3.0] license at play (unported, an EU port, another port), uses which implicate only database rights will not trigger the license conditions, while uses which implicate copyright will.
In addition, the policy precludes exportation of the sui generis rights to jurisdictions where such rights are not recognized through inclusion of a territoriality limitation, thereby avoiding the imposition of restrictions based on sui generis rights via contract where those rights are not enforceable or recognized. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

License Versions

2012-02-16T14:22:21Z

Nagelstudio: /* Collecting societies regimes addressed */

This page identifies some of the improvements to the Creative Commons license suite from the publication of the first licenses in December, 2002, through the current version 3.0, and highlights important similarities among the major license versions released to date. For more information on using CC tools or works offered under Creative Commons licenses, consult the [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions Frequently Asked Questions page.] For a further historical perspective, you may also review defunct CC legal tools at the [http://creativecommons.org/retiredlicenses retired legal tools page].

==License blog posts==
The chart below presents the major license versions, their launch dates, and blog posts announcing public comment periods, the launch of a license suite, and changes to the new licenses. It does not reference the unfinished version 3.x ([http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3.01 3.01], [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3.5 3.5]) licenses, which are not in active discussion and are not expected to be published. Version 3.0 is the recommended and most recently-published Creative Commons license suite; the 3.x license discussions address further potential upgrades and changes that may (or may not) be considered when CC commences discussion on the next [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_4 version 4.0 license]. The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Legalcode_errata Legalcode Errata page], to which you should feel free to contribute, catalogs minor bugs in the licenses such as typographical errors.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! License version*
! Release date
! Call for public comment
! Launch announcement
! Explanation of changes from prior version
|-
| 1.0
| 2002 Dec 16
|
| [http://creativecommons.org/press-releases/entry/3476 Creative Commons Unveils Machine-Readable Copyright Licenses]
|
|-
| 2.0
| 2004 May 25
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3981 Versioning -- Public Review Begins]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 Announcing (and explaining) our new 2.0 licenses]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 Announcing (and explaining) our new 2.0 licenses]
|-
| 2.5
| 2005 June
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5447 Tweaking CC's Standard Attribution Language -- An Invitation to Comment]
|
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5457 Comments Period Drawing to a close for Draft License Version 2.5]
|-
| 3.0
| 2007 Feb 23
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/6017 Version 3.0 -- Public Discussion Launched]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/7249 Version 3.0 Launched]
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3 Creative Commons Version 3.0 Licenses -- A Brief Explanation]
|}

* Note that CC also released a version 2.1 suite for jurisdictions like Spain, Australia and Japan, whose localized ports of the 2.0 suite contained errors.

==International License Development Process==

Creative Commons develops, releases and updates its public copyright licenses (and other legal tools) via an open and inclusive process of engagement with Creative Commons’ global network of attorneys and affiliates, as well as varied communities and constituents, that includes the publication of drafts, formal comment periods and transparent decision-making. This process culminates in the publication of the preferred, most up-to-date set of CC licenses for use around the world. Creative Commons released its latest version of the licenses in February 2007. Those licenses are known as the 3.0 international (also called the 3.0 “unported” and formerly referred to under version 2.0 as the “generic”) license suite.

While each set of licenses produced by CC is drafted to conform with copyright law, many of the improvements to the version 3.0 license suite brought the licenses further into line with international copyright law. Once a suite of licenses is released, Creative Commons grants permission to legal experts around the world under formal agreement to adapt (or “port”) the licenses where necessary to more fully align the text with the laws of different legal jurisdictions and translate the licenses to the local language(s). See our [http://creativecommons.org/international international] page for more information or access the [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database jurisdiction database] to compare the international (unported) licenses and the ported licenses of various jurisdictions.

In each instance, the resulting ported licenses are intended to have the same legal meaning and effect as the international (unported) licenses and the ported licenses of other jurisdictions at the same license version. Porting follows the same open and inclusive processes used to produce the international licenses: publication of drafts, comment periods, engagement with communities and constituents who use the licenses, and transparent decision-making processes. It also involves close oversight and review by CC staff.

==License Suite Versions==

The chart below and linked explanations that follow detail some of the improvements and important similarities among Creative Commons license versions. Some of the explanations contain links to further information on the topic.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! License Suite Version
! 1.0
! 2.0
! 2.5
! 3.0
|-
|'''All international (unported/generic) and ported licenses'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Nomenclature_.28for_unported_licenses.29 Nomenclature (for unported licenses)]
| Generic license
| Generic license
| Generic license
| International (unported) license
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Technical_Measures_by_Licensees_Prohibited Technological measures by users of CC licensed works prohibited]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Attribution_required Attribution required]
| Not all licenses
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Credit_to_others_contemplated Credit to others contemplated]
| No
| No
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Requests_for_removal_of_attribution_contemplated Requests for removal of attribution contemplated]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Collecting_societies_regimes_addressed Collecting societies regimes addressed]
| No
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Representations_and_warranties_by_licensor_included Representations and warranties by licensor included]
| Yes
| No
| No
| No
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#.22No_endorsement.22_clause_included "No endorsement" clause included]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Moral_rights_clause_included Moral rights clause included]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Adaptations_.28if_allowed.29_must_be_marked_as_such Adaptations (if allowed) must be marked as such]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Definition_of_.22NonCommercial.22_unchanged_.28same_in_all_versions.29 Definition of "NonCommercial" (has remained unchanged in all versions)]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Use_of_licenses_for_copyrightable_compilations_of_data_anticipated Use of licenses for copyrightable compilations of data anticipated]
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (explicit)
|-
| '''International (unported/generic) ShareAlike licenses'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Compatible_licenses_may_be_used_for_adaptations_of_works_originally_offered_under_CC_ShareAlike_licenses Compatible licenses may be used for adaptations of works originally offered under CC ShareAlike licenses]
| No
| CC only
| CC only
| Yes
|-
| '''Licenses ported to jurisdictions with sui generis rights'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Sui_generis_rights_in_databases_are_waived_for_uses_that_do_not_implicate_copyright Sui generis rights in databases are waived for uses that do not implicate copyright]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|}

==Nomenclature (for unported licenses)==

Before the launch of the version 3.0 licenses, the international (unported) licenses were called the “generic” licenses. The generic licenses were drafted to conform with U.S. law and conventions. Starting with version 3.0, Creative Commons [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#Further_Internationalization drafted its core suite of licenses to conform to relevant international treaties and drafting conventions]. In this sense, the version 3.0 international (unported) license suite is jurisdiction-agnostic: it does not mention nor is it drafted against any particular jurisdiction's laws or statutes, but rather it is intended to function without adjustment in all jurisdictions around the world. You may [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database access the jurisdiction database] and compare the international (unported) license to the ported licenses of various jurisdictions.

==Technical Measures by Licensees Prohibited==

All CC license versions prohibit licensees (as opposed to licensors) from using effective technological measures such as “digital rights management” software to restrict the ability of those who receive a CC licensed work from a licensee to exercise rights granted under the license. To be clear, encryption or an access limitation is not necessarily a technical protection measure prohibited by the licenses. For example, content sent via email and encrypted with the recipient's public key does not restrict use of the work by the recipient. Likewise, limiting recipients to a set of users (e.g., with a username and password) does not restrict use of the work by the recipients. In the cases above, encryption or an access limitation does not violate the prohibition on technological measures because the recipient is not prevented from exercising all rights granted by the license (including rights of further redistribution).

[http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#Debian This treatment was re-evaluated during the public process leading to release of the version 3.0 license suite.] CC considered arguments in favor of such measures, coupled with an obligation of parallel distribution. However, those arguments were ultimately rejected.

==Attribution required==
The version 1.0 suite is unique because it contains some CC licenses that do not require attribution. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 All subsequent license suites make attribution a standard requirement] unless the licensor specifies otherwise. The required mode of attribution differs slightly among the versions, and is progressively more flexible with each subsequent version.

==Credit to others contemplated==

Prior to the version 2.5 suite, CC licenses contemplated crediting the author only. Versions 2.5 and 3.0 [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5447 allow licensors to identify another party or organization for attribution], called the “Attribution Party.” This feature was introduced in part to alleviate burdensome or difficult attribution situations, such as may be the case when many people contribute to a wiki article or other multi-author, collaborative effort. In versions 2.5 and 3.0, licensors may designate another party for attribution purposes -- such as a sponsor institute, publishing entity or journal -- in addition to or instead of the author. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5457 You may review some of the concerns raised when CC proposed this change].

==Requests for removal of attribution contemplated==

All license versions after version 1.0 require attribution. However, legislation in many countries gives authors the right to control the use of their name in association with their works. Therefore, CC licenses require licensees to remove (otherwise required) attribution to the creator from collections or adaptations to the extent practicable at the creator’s request.

==Collecting societies regimes addressed==
Many users of Creative Commons licenses are also members of collective rights societies like ASCAP and BMI, which manage copyright on behalf of owners. Every version from the 2.0 suite onward contains clauses that account for the existence of those arrangements. They provide, for instance, that for works offered under a NonCommercial license, the licensor retains the right to collect royalties for commercial uses of the work. The [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 structure of the provisions in the 2.x licenses] (2.0, 2.1 and 2.5) differs from that in the version 3.0 licenses. The 2.x licenses specifically regulate music, sound recordings and webcasting. As those licenses were ported to different jurisdictions, those provisions were adjusted to conform to the local collecting society situation.
The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#International_Harmonization_.E2.80.94_Collecting_Societies version 3.0 licenses employ a broad, harmonized strategy to collective rights societies]. This strategy still allows jurisdictions to adopt an approach that best aligns with local law and society structure, but also ensures that the approach is implemented consistently across jurisdictions. In the international (unported) license, as regards compulsory royalty collection, the licensor reserves the right to collect those royalties in jurisdictions in which collection cannot be waived. In those jurisdictions in which compulsory royalty collection can be waived, the right to collect royalties is waived completely for those licenses that permit commercial use and reserved for commercial uses in those licenses that permit NonCommercial use only. For voluntary royalty schema, the licensor reserves the right to collect royalties for commercial uses in those licenses that permit NonCommercial use only, and completely waives the right to collect such royalties for licenses permitting commercial use. This clause covers both individual royalty collection and, in the event that the licensor is a member of a collecting society that collects such royalties, collection via such societies. Some affiliates porting the [http://fashionstylings.blogspot.com version 3.0] licenses to interface with local collective rights regimes have chosen to include only those clauses which address the particular situation in the jurisdiction. Others have adopted all the language from the international (unported) license in hopes of international [http://dieversicherungen.blogspot.com harmonization], or out of concern that their jurisdiction’s regime may change. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different * [http://goldneu.blogspot.com jurisdictions] implemented this section of the license].

==Representations and warranties by licensor included==

In the 1.0 license suite, the licensor extends warranties, for instance that the work does not infringe the work of another. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 These warranties were eliminated in all subsequent license versions.] All post-version 1.0 suites explicitly offer the work “AS IS” and disclaim all liabilities. Notwithstanding, some ports have included warranties where required under local law. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

=="No endorsement" clause included==

While attribution is required in all licenses post-version 1.0, a licensee may not provide credit in a way that suggests endorsement or sponsorship by the licensor. In some jurisdictions, wrongfully implying that an author, publisher or anyone else endorses a particular use of a work may be unlawful. While this has always been the case, [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#MIT the version 3.0 licenses for the first time explicitly prohibit endorsement or sponsorship without the consent of the licensor].

==Moral rights clause included==

While the existence and extent of moral rights differ by jurisdiction, the most consistently present rights are those of attribution and integrity (the right to prevent or halt the prejudicial use of one’s work by another). The 1.0 and 2.x generic licenses were drafted to conform to U.S. law, and because U.S. law recognizes moral rights in only very limited circumstances, the generic versions of those licenses suites do not address moral rights of authors.

Reflecting the global, harmonized approach of the version 3.0 license suite, [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#International_Harmonization_.E2.80.93_Moral_Rights CC addressed the issue clearly in the international (unported) licenses]. Since moral rights are not waivable in most jurisdictions, CC did not include a waiver of those rights in the international licenses. Instead, the licenses specifically instruct users that they “must not distort, mutilate, modify or take other derogatory action in relation to the Work which would be prejudicial to the Original Author's honor or reputation.” This mandate forbids licensees from making uses that would otherwise violate authors’ moral rights of integrity. The attribution requirement is intended to satisfy the right of attribution. In the porting process, some jurisdictions slightly adjust this provision with CC’s permission to specify that moral rights are waived to the extent necessary to effect the license to the degree a waiver is possible under applicable law. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

==Adaptations (if allowed) must be marked as such==

Beginning with the 3.0 license suite, licenses that permit the creation of adaptations require licensees to take reasonable steps to label the work as such. For instance, the adaptation could include a notice to the effect that, “The original work has been modified.”

==Definition of "NonCommercial" unchanged (same in all versions)==
While Creative Commons’ licenses have evolved over time, the scope of permitted uses under the NonCommercial (“NC”) licenses has remained unchanged across all license suites. The [http://nagelstudio.blogage.de NonCommercial] clause prohibits the exercise of rights granted under the NC license “in any manner that is primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation.” Creative Commons carried out a [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/17127 study on the NonCommerical clause and users’ understandings]. However, the exact meaning of the clause is still debated.

==Use of licenses for copyrightable compilations of data anticipated==
Creative Commons licenses may be used with all copyrightable works (note that CC does not recommend its licenses for use with computer software). Such works include compilations of data that exhibit the requisite level of creativity for copyright protection under applicable national law. Thus, to the extent compilations of data are protected by copyright, Creative Commons licenses are suitable licenses for exercising that right. For the avoidance of doubt, version 3.0 licenses explicitly include such compilations in the definition of “work.”

==Compatible licenses may be used for adaptations of works originally offered under CC ShareAlike licenses==

Users of works licensed under CC’s ShareAlike licenses must make adaptations and collections of those works available under the same terms and conditions. The version 1.0 licenses require that the adaptations be distributed under exactly the same license as was applied to the original work. Starting with the release of the [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 2.x license suites, CC expanded compatibility] by allowing adaptations to be licensed under the same or later version of the original license, including other ported versions of the same or later-version of the license. The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#BY-SA_.E2.80.94_Compatibility_Structure_Introduced 3.0 Attribution-ShareAlike goes one step further], by allowing adaptations of works licensed under its terms to be licensed under a “Creative Commons Compatible License,” defined to mean licenses approved by CC as essentially equivalent to the 3.0 Attribution-ShareAlike license. To date, CC has not approved any other licenses. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/8213 You may also review CC’s statement of intent for ShareAlike licenses].

==Sui generis rights in databases are waived for uses that do not implicate copyright==

A few early (2.0, 2.5) European jurisdiction CC license ports licensed database rights along with copyright.

Although the generic and international (unported) license suites do not mention sui generis rights, starting with the version 3.0 licenses, CC established a [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/images/f/f6/V3_Database_Rights.pdf policy for how those rights are addressed in ported licenses in those jurisdictions where sui generis rights exist.] The policy provides that version [http://blogya.de/urlaubferien 3.0 EU jurisdiction] ports must license sui generis rights subject to the terms and conditions of the license just like copyrights and neighboring rights, but also must waive license requirements and prohibitions (attribution, share-alike, etc) for uses triggering database rights — so that if the use of a database published under a CC license implicated only database rights, but not copyright, the CC license requirements and prohibitions would not apply to that use. The license requirements and prohibitions, however, continue to apply to all uses triggering copyright. Other ports and the unported license are silent on database rights: databases and data are licensed (i.e., subject to restrictions detailed in the license) to the extent copyrightable, and if data in the database or the database itself are not copyrightable the license restrictions do not apply to those parts (though they still apply to the remainder). Thus, regardless of the [http://www.nagelstudio-harburg.com CC 3.0] license at play (unported, an EU port, another port), uses which implicate only database rights will not trigger the license conditions, while uses which implicate copyright will.
In addition, the policy precludes exportation of the sui generis rights to jurisdictions where such rights are not recognized through inclusion of a territoriality limitation, thereby avoiding the imposition of restrictions based on sui generis rights via contract where those rights are not enforceable or recognized. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

License Versions

2012-02-16T14:20:50Z

Nagelstudio: /* Collecting societies regimes addressed */

This page identifies some of the improvements to the Creative Commons license suite from the publication of the first licenses in December, 2002, through the current version 3.0, and highlights important similarities among the major license versions released to date. For more information on using CC tools or works offered under Creative Commons licenses, consult the [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions Frequently Asked Questions page.] For a further historical perspective, you may also review defunct CC legal tools at the [http://creativecommons.org/retiredlicenses retired legal tools page].

==License blog posts==
The chart below presents the major license versions, their launch dates, and blog posts announcing public comment periods, the launch of a license suite, and changes to the new licenses. It does not reference the unfinished version 3.x ([http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3.01 3.01], [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3.5 3.5]) licenses, which are not in active discussion and are not expected to be published. Version 3.0 is the recommended and most recently-published Creative Commons license suite; the 3.x license discussions address further potential upgrades and changes that may (or may not) be considered when CC commences discussion on the next [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_4 version 4.0 license]. The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Legalcode_errata Legalcode Errata page], to which you should feel free to contribute, catalogs minor bugs in the licenses such as typographical errors.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! License version*
! Release date
! Call for public comment
! Launch announcement
! Explanation of changes from prior version
|-
| 1.0
| 2002 Dec 16
|
| [http://creativecommons.org/press-releases/entry/3476 Creative Commons Unveils Machine-Readable Copyright Licenses]
|
|-
| 2.0
| 2004 May 25
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3981 Versioning -- Public Review Begins]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 Announcing (and explaining) our new 2.0 licenses]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 Announcing (and explaining) our new 2.0 licenses]
|-
| 2.5
| 2005 June
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5447 Tweaking CC's Standard Attribution Language -- An Invitation to Comment]
|
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5457 Comments Period Drawing to a close for Draft License Version 2.5]
|-
| 3.0
| 2007 Feb 23
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/6017 Version 3.0 -- Public Discussion Launched]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/7249 Version 3.0 Launched]
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3 Creative Commons Version 3.0 Licenses -- A Brief Explanation]
|}

* Note that CC also released a version 2.1 suite for jurisdictions like Spain, Australia and Japan, whose localized ports of the 2.0 suite contained errors.

==International License Development Process==

Creative Commons develops, releases and updates its public copyright licenses (and other legal tools) via an open and inclusive process of engagement with Creative Commons’ global network of attorneys and affiliates, as well as varied communities and constituents, that includes the publication of drafts, formal comment periods and transparent decision-making. This process culminates in the publication of the preferred, most up-to-date set of CC licenses for use around the world. Creative Commons released its latest version of the licenses in February 2007. Those licenses are known as the 3.0 international (also called the 3.0 “unported” and formerly referred to under version 2.0 as the “generic”) license suite.

While each set of licenses produced by CC is drafted to conform with copyright law, many of the improvements to the version 3.0 license suite brought the licenses further into line with international copyright law. Once a suite of licenses is released, Creative Commons grants permission to legal experts around the world under formal agreement to adapt (or “port”) the licenses where necessary to more fully align the text with the laws of different legal jurisdictions and translate the licenses to the local language(s). See our [http://creativecommons.org/international international] page for more information or access the [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database jurisdiction database] to compare the international (unported) licenses and the ported licenses of various jurisdictions.

In each instance, the resulting ported licenses are intended to have the same legal meaning and effect as the international (unported) licenses and the ported licenses of other jurisdictions at the same license version. Porting follows the same open and inclusive processes used to produce the international licenses: publication of drafts, comment periods, engagement with communities and constituents who use the licenses, and transparent decision-making processes. It also involves close oversight and review by CC staff.

==License Suite Versions==

The chart below and linked explanations that follow detail some of the improvements and important similarities among Creative Commons license versions. Some of the explanations contain links to further information on the topic.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! License Suite Version
! 1.0
! 2.0
! 2.5
! 3.0
|-
|'''All international (unported/generic) and ported licenses'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Nomenclature_.28for_unported_licenses.29 Nomenclature (for unported licenses)]
| Generic license
| Generic license
| Generic license
| International (unported) license
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Technical_Measures_by_Licensees_Prohibited Technological measures by users of CC licensed works prohibited]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Attribution_required Attribution required]
| Not all licenses
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Credit_to_others_contemplated Credit to others contemplated]
| No
| No
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Requests_for_removal_of_attribution_contemplated Requests for removal of attribution contemplated]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Collecting_societies_regimes_addressed Collecting societies regimes addressed]
| No
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Representations_and_warranties_by_licensor_included Representations and warranties by licensor included]
| Yes
| No
| No
| No
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#.22No_endorsement.22_clause_included "No endorsement" clause included]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Moral_rights_clause_included Moral rights clause included]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Adaptations_.28if_allowed.29_must_be_marked_as_such Adaptations (if allowed) must be marked as such]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Definition_of_.22NonCommercial.22_unchanged_.28same_in_all_versions.29 Definition of "NonCommercial" (has remained unchanged in all versions)]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Use_of_licenses_for_copyrightable_compilations_of_data_anticipated Use of licenses for copyrightable compilations of data anticipated]
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (explicit)
|-
| '''International (unported/generic) ShareAlike licenses'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Compatible_licenses_may_be_used_for_adaptations_of_works_originally_offered_under_CC_ShareAlike_licenses Compatible licenses may be used for adaptations of works originally offered under CC ShareAlike licenses]
| No
| CC only
| CC only
| Yes
|-
| '''Licenses ported to jurisdictions with sui generis rights'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Sui_generis_rights_in_databases_are_waived_for_uses_that_do_not_implicate_copyright Sui generis rights in databases are waived for uses that do not implicate copyright]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|}

==Nomenclature (for unported licenses)==

Before the launch of the version 3.0 licenses, the international (unported) licenses were called the “generic” licenses. The generic licenses were drafted to conform with U.S. law and conventions. Starting with version 3.0, Creative Commons [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#Further_Internationalization drafted its core suite of licenses to conform to relevant international treaties and drafting conventions]. In this sense, the version 3.0 international (unported) license suite is jurisdiction-agnostic: it does not mention nor is it drafted against any particular jurisdiction's laws or statutes, but rather it is intended to function without adjustment in all jurisdictions around the world. You may [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database access the jurisdiction database] and compare the international (unported) license to the ported licenses of various jurisdictions.

==Technical Measures by Licensees Prohibited==

All CC license versions prohibit licensees (as opposed to licensors) from using effective technological measures such as “digital rights management” software to restrict the ability of those who receive a CC licensed work from a licensee to exercise rights granted under the license. To be clear, encryption or an access limitation is not necessarily a technical protection measure prohibited by the licenses. For example, content sent via email and encrypted with the recipient's public key does not restrict use of the work by the recipient. Likewise, limiting recipients to a set of users (e.g., with a username and password) does not restrict use of the work by the recipients. In the cases above, encryption or an access limitation does not violate the prohibition on technological measures because the recipient is not prevented from exercising all rights granted by the license (including rights of further redistribution).

[http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#Debian This treatment was re-evaluated during the public process leading to release of the version 3.0 license suite.] CC considered arguments in favor of such measures, coupled with an obligation of parallel distribution. However, those arguments were ultimately rejected.

==Attribution required==
The version 1.0 suite is unique because it contains some CC licenses that do not require attribution. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 All subsequent license suites make attribution a standard requirement] unless the licensor specifies otherwise. The required mode of attribution differs slightly among the versions, and is progressively more flexible with each subsequent version.

==Credit to others contemplated==

Prior to the version 2.5 suite, CC licenses contemplated crediting the author only. Versions 2.5 and 3.0 [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5447 allow licensors to identify another party or organization for attribution], called the “Attribution Party.” This feature was introduced in part to alleviate burdensome or difficult attribution situations, such as may be the case when many people contribute to a wiki article or other multi-author, collaborative effort. In versions 2.5 and 3.0, licensors may designate another party for attribution purposes -- such as a sponsor institute, publishing entity or journal -- in addition to or instead of the author. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5457 You may review some of the concerns raised when CC proposed this change].

==Requests for removal of attribution contemplated==

All license versions after version 1.0 require attribution. However, legislation in many countries gives authors the right to control the use of their name in association with their works. Therefore, CC licenses require licensees to remove (otherwise required) attribution to the creator from collections or adaptations to the extent practicable at the creator’s request.

==Collecting societies regimes addressed==
Many users of Creative Commons licenses are also members of collective rights societies like ASCAP and BMI, which manage copyright on behalf of owners. Every version from the 2.0 suite onward contains clauses that account for the existence of those arrangements. They provide, for instance, that for works offered under a NonCommercial license, the licensor retains the right to collect royalties for commercial uses of the work. The [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 structure of the provisions in the 2.x licenses] (2.0, 2.1 and 2.5) differs from that in the version 3.0 licenses. The 2.x licenses specifically regulate music, sound recordings and webcasting. As those licenses were ported to different jurisdictions, those provisions were adjusted to conform to the local collecting society situation.
The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#International_Harmonization_.E2.80.94_Collecting_Societies version 3.0 licenses employ a broad, harmonized strategy to collective rights societies]. This strategy still allows jurisdictions to adopt an approach that best aligns with local law and society structure, but also ensures that the approach is implemented consistently across jurisdictions. In the international (unported) license, as regards compulsory royalty collection, the licensor reserves the right to collect those royalties in jurisdictions in which collection cannot be waived. In those jurisdictions in which compulsory royalty collection can be waived, the right to collect royalties is waived completely for those licenses that permit commercial use and reserved for commercial uses in those licenses that permit NonCommercial use only. For voluntary royalty schema, the licensor reserves the right to collect royalties for commercial uses in those licenses that permit NonCommercial use only, and completely waives the right to collect such royalties for licenses permitting commercial use. This clause covers both individual royalty collection and, in the event that the licensor is a member of a collecting society that collects such royalties, collection via such societies. Some affiliates porting the [http://fashionstylings.blogspot.com version 3.0] licenses to interface with local collective rights regimes have chosen to include only those clauses which address the particular situation in the jurisdiction. Others have adopted all the language from the international (unported) license in hopes of international [http://www.nagelstudio-hamburg.net harmonization], or out of concern that their jurisdiction’s regime may change. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

==Representations and warranties by licensor included==

In the 1.0 license suite, the licensor extends warranties, for instance that the work does not infringe the work of another. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 These warranties were eliminated in all subsequent license versions.] All post-version 1.0 suites explicitly offer the work “AS IS” and disclaim all liabilities. Notwithstanding, some ports have included warranties where required under local law. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

=="No endorsement" clause included==

While attribution is required in all licenses post-version 1.0, a licensee may not provide credit in a way that suggests endorsement or sponsorship by the licensor. In some jurisdictions, wrongfully implying that an author, publisher or anyone else endorses a particular use of a work may be unlawful. While this has always been the case, [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#MIT the version 3.0 licenses for the first time explicitly prohibit endorsement or sponsorship without the consent of the licensor].

==Moral rights clause included==

While the existence and extent of moral rights differ by jurisdiction, the most consistently present rights are those of attribution and integrity (the right to prevent or halt the prejudicial use of one’s work by another). The 1.0 and 2.x generic licenses were drafted to conform to U.S. law, and because U.S. law recognizes moral rights in only very limited circumstances, the generic versions of those licenses suites do not address moral rights of authors.

Reflecting the global, harmonized approach of the version 3.0 license suite, [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#International_Harmonization_.E2.80.93_Moral_Rights CC addressed the issue clearly in the international (unported) licenses]. Since moral rights are not waivable in most jurisdictions, CC did not include a waiver of those rights in the international licenses. Instead, the licenses specifically instruct users that they “must not distort, mutilate, modify or take other derogatory action in relation to the Work which would be prejudicial to the Original Author's honor or reputation.” This mandate forbids licensees from making uses that would otherwise violate authors’ moral rights of integrity. The attribution requirement is intended to satisfy the right of attribution. In the porting process, some jurisdictions slightly adjust this provision with CC’s permission to specify that moral rights are waived to the extent necessary to effect the license to the degree a waiver is possible under applicable law. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

==Adaptations (if allowed) must be marked as such==

Beginning with the 3.0 license suite, licenses that permit the creation of adaptations require licensees to take reasonable steps to label the work as such. For instance, the adaptation could include a notice to the effect that, “The original work has been modified.”

==Definition of "NonCommercial" unchanged (same in all versions)==
While Creative Commons’ licenses have evolved over time, the scope of permitted uses under the NonCommercial (“NC”) licenses has remained unchanged across all license suites. The [http://nagelstudio.blogage.de NonCommercial] clause prohibits the exercise of rights granted under the NC license “in any manner that is primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation.” Creative Commons carried out a [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/17127 study on the NonCommerical clause and users’ understandings]. However, the exact meaning of the clause is still debated.

==Use of licenses for copyrightable compilations of data anticipated==
Creative Commons licenses may be used with all copyrightable works (note that CC does not recommend its licenses for use with computer software). Such works include compilations of data that exhibit the requisite level of creativity for copyright protection under applicable national law. Thus, to the extent compilations of data are protected by copyright, Creative Commons licenses are suitable licenses for exercising that right. For the avoidance of doubt, version 3.0 licenses explicitly include such compilations in the definition of “work.”

==Compatible licenses may be used for adaptations of works originally offered under CC ShareAlike licenses==

Users of works licensed under CC’s ShareAlike licenses must make adaptations and collections of those works available under the same terms and conditions. The version 1.0 licenses require that the adaptations be distributed under exactly the same license as was applied to the original work. Starting with the release of the [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 2.x license suites, CC expanded compatibility] by allowing adaptations to be licensed under the same or later version of the original license, including other ported versions of the same or later-version of the license. The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#BY-SA_.E2.80.94_Compatibility_Structure_Introduced 3.0 Attribution-ShareAlike goes one step further], by allowing adaptations of works licensed under its terms to be licensed under a “Creative Commons Compatible License,” defined to mean licenses approved by CC as essentially equivalent to the 3.0 Attribution-ShareAlike license. To date, CC has not approved any other licenses. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/8213 You may also review CC’s statement of intent for ShareAlike licenses].

==Sui generis rights in databases are waived for uses that do not implicate copyright==

A few early (2.0, 2.5) European jurisdiction CC license ports licensed database rights along with copyright.

Although the generic and international (unported) license suites do not mention sui generis rights, starting with the version 3.0 licenses, CC established a [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/images/f/f6/V3_Database_Rights.pdf policy for how those rights are addressed in ported licenses in those jurisdictions where sui generis rights exist.] The policy provides that version [http://blogya.de/urlaubferien 3.0 EU jurisdiction] ports must license sui generis rights subject to the terms and conditions of the license just like copyrights and neighboring rights, but also must waive license requirements and prohibitions (attribution, share-alike, etc) for uses triggering database rights — so that if the use of a database published under a CC license implicated only database rights, but not copyright, the CC license requirements and prohibitions would not apply to that use. The license requirements and prohibitions, however, continue to apply to all uses triggering copyright. Other ports and the unported license are silent on database rights: databases and data are licensed (i.e., subject to restrictions detailed in the license) to the extent copyrightable, and if data in the database or the database itself are not copyrightable the license restrictions do not apply to those parts (though they still apply to the remainder). Thus, regardless of the [http://www.nagelstudio-harburg.com CC 3.0] license at play (unported, an EU port, another port), uses which implicate only database rights will not trigger the license conditions, while uses which implicate copyright will.
In addition, the policy precludes exportation of the sui generis rights to jurisdictions where such rights are not recognized through inclusion of a territoriality limitation, thereby avoiding the imposition of restrictions based on sui generis rights via contract where those rights are not enforceable or recognized. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

Audio

2012-02-16T10:46:52Z

Nagelstudio: /* Audio Related CC Blog Posts */

[[Category:Media]]

This is a list of Creative Commons licensed audio media. [http://creativecommons.org/audio The original page] is partially ported here.

== Featured Audio Sites ==

{{#ask:
[[Format::Sound]]
|?mainurl=Website
|?size=Size
|limit=100
|mainlabel=Name
}}

== [[Podcasting Legal Guide]] ==

Inspired by the Electronic Frontier Foundation's [http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/ Legal Guide for Bloggers], the Podcasting Legal Guide is designed to outline both legal and practical issues that are specifically relevant for podcasters, such as using music and video in a podcast.

== Audio Related CC Blog Posts ==
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4225 This week in amateur radio]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4161 The Metaphysician]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4159 Audioscrobbler]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4114 Books on MP3: Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4009 zug's protest song]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3985 Electrobel music community]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3879 Loca Records]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3840 Fray Audio archive]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3803 The Speech Accent Archive]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3744 Opsound in Action]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3741 The Phoenix Trap]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3700 Erik Ostrom]
* Please add to the list

Marking your work with a CC license

2012-02-16T10:42:52Z

Nagelstudio: /* Marking on Your Site */

==Best Practices for Marking Content with CC Licenses: Creators ==

<div style="padding: 2%;margin:0em 0em 1em 0em; border:1px dotted red; background:#eee; width:60%">
NOTE: This page is for creators and copyright owners who are looking to CC license their own work. If you are looking for the best way to mark CC-licensed work as a user, see http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Marking/Users. If you own a content-sharing site or platform that hosts works by other creators and are interested in enabling CC licensing for your users, see http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Web_Integration.
</div>

As a creator using a CC license, it is important to properly note the license you have chosen so that others know what they can and can't do with your work. No matter what the context, CC licenses should be clearly cited to enable their full potential as a legal tool.

==Marking on Your Site==
Our [http://creativecommons.org/choose/ license chooser] is designed to make this process simple - answer a few questions and a formatted HTML code will be generated for you:

# Insert this HTML code into your webpage so that your work is clearly marked.
# This HTML code includes [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Rdfa RDFa], a very important aspect of marking your work so that others can find it easily.

The specifics of inserting the code depend on how you edit your website. The block of code should be inserted into the page HTML - most desktop website tools like Dreamweaver, Frontpage, or GoLive offer a "code view" that lets you see the code that makes up your page. Near the end of the page before you see </body></html>, paste the HTML code in directly.

If all of the resources you are publishing on a single website are licensed under the same [http://nailstk.wordpress.com CC license], it makes sense to paste the HTML code into your website’s template (e.g., in a footer or sidebar area). After saving the template, the chosen license information should appear everywhere on your site. Whether you add license information to a single page or an entire site, once live on the Internet, the license information will be displayed and the machines will be able to detect the license status automatically.

From there, here are three steps to license notice perfection:

# The full URI (link) to the license. Example: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/.
# A visible notation (most commonly text) that states the license being used. Example: Except where otherwise noted, content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
# Optionally, the appropriate Creative Commons license button or CC icon and license property icon(s).

{| cellspacing="5" cellpadding="10" style="padding: 2%;margin:0em 0em 1em 0em; border:1px dotted red; background:#eee; width:100%"
|
NOTE: Because each CC license represents a different set of permissions and restrictions, it is important to note the specific license used. Displaying only the CC icon, “Creative Commons”, or “Some Rights Reserved” is insufficient; always include the full URL.
|}
In order for others to credit you for your work, it is preferable to provide an attribution name and URI. The [http://creativecommons.org/choose/ license chooser] provides the proper license button (if you fill in attribution fields) as well as RDFa attribution data. Alternatively, high resolution buttons and license icons are available from [http://creativecommons.org/about/downloads our logo download page].

For example, see the following screenshot of a license notification that incorporates these best practices:

[[Image:By_small.jpg]]
<br/><small>This work by [http://opencontent.org/blog David Wiley] is licensed under a [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/ Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States].</small>

If you visit David's [http://opencontent.org/blog/ blog], you will see this notice at the bottom of the page. The license icon links to the license deed that includes attribution information specific to David. In this case, David filled out the attribution fields in the [http://creativecommons.org/choose/ license chooser], which provided the proper license button and formatted attribution information. He then pasted the resulting HTML code with RDFa into his webpage and included the textual notation of attribution and the specific license that you see above.

Still confused? Take a look at our visual guide. See [[Website/Publish]] for step by step visuals of copying and pasting the HTML code. This page also contains the same information for pages that host a specific type of [http://nageldesignschulung.pbworks.com media] ([[Publish/Audio|audio]], [[Publish/Video|video]], [[Publish/Images|images]], and [[Publish/Text|text]] -- which includes various [[Publish/Text#Blog|blogging]] platforms).

If your work is a derivative of another original CC-licensed work, be sure to look at our [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Marking/Users Marking for Users] primer as well.

== Marking Specific Media ==

While remaining similar in intent, marking will vary depending on the medium. The following are some helpful tips on making sure your media is marked correctly.

For offline works in general, consider publishing a web page with licensing information about your material. Doing so enables your work to be found by search engines and other web discovery tools.

Below are general examples for each medium. If a more technical explanation is your goal, please see [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Marking_works Marking Works (technical)]:

<div style="padding:1.25em 1em; margin-left:-1em; margin-right:-1em; -moz-border-radius:5px; -webkit-border-radius:5px; background-color: #eaeaea; overflow: auto;">
{{PageColumn|
===Offline Text===
<small>(for online text see [[Marking/Creators#Marking_on_Your_Site|Marking on Your Site]])</small>
*For documents that are meant to be shared in print format (not read online) it is suggested to use a title and/or copyright page to include the Copyright notice and CC license information.
**After going through the [http://creativecommons.org/choose/ license chooser], you can click on "Mark a document not on the web, add this text to your work" in the lower right column.
**And/or you can refer to this sample copyright notice: "Copyright (c) 2009 by Greg Grossmeier. This work is made available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/."
*It is also suggested that you use a visual license notice. Here is a collection of visual markers that can be used:
**[[CC markers]] and [http://creativecommons.org/about/downloads/ official CC license icons]
**[[User submitted markers]]
* [[Publish/Text | Advanced Instructions: Text]]

===Image===
*Adding a watermark or other visual marker on an image can ultimately detract from the original. If you choose to, a safe method of indicating license choice consists of two actions:
**When publishing the image on a website, make sure that your license choice is clearly visible, preferably indicated with one of our [http://creativecommons.org/about/downloads/ license icons].
**Ensure search engines can see it also via the use of [[RDFa]], which you can copy and paste from the HTML code given to you by the [http://creativecommons.org/choose/ license chooser].
*Additionally, you can ensure that the image has [[XMP]] metadata support with your name, date, and license choice.
*[[Publish/Image| Advanced Instructions: Image]]
}}
{{PageColumn|
===Audio===
*For audio files, two actions are recommended:
**When publishing the audio file on a website, make sure that your license choice is clearly visible, preferably using one of our [http://creativecommons.org/about/downloads/ license icons].
**Ensure search engines can find it via the use of [[RDFa]], which you can copy and paste from the HTML code provided by the [http://creativecommons.org/choose/ license chooser].
*Additionally, you may want to ensure that the audio file has metadata support with your name, date, and license choice.
**One easy way to do this is to upload your file to music sharing site that has enabled CC licensing. See [[Marking/Creators#Marking on Other Sites|Marking on Other Sites]] below.
**Alternatively, you can use your favorite audio player to add in the information. To learn more see [[Embedded_Metadata]]. You can also see how to add ID3 tags to a common audio file type, such as the [[MP3]], or browse other [[UsingMarkup|file types]].
*Also, if it is practical to do so (for podcasts, for instance, not song tracks), add an audio bumper to the beginning of the file to indicate your choice of license. Here are some [http://creativecommons.org/podcasting intro bumpers] which you can use to build upon.
*[[Publish/Audio| Advanced Instructions: Audio]]

===Video===
*For movie formats that have the ability to include a 2-5 second copyright frame, it is advisable to use the same format as what is suggested for textual works:
**Sample Copyright notice: Copyright (c) 2009 by Greg Grossmeier. This work is made available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/.
*Here is a collection of stills which can be used as license bumpers:
**[http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC_video_bumpers Official CC bumpers]
**[http://wiki.creativecommons.org/User_submitted_bumpers Community Submitted bumpers]
*[[Publish/Video| Advanced Instructions: Video]]
}}
</div>

== Marking Specific Formats ==
* CC-[[OpenOfficeOrg Addin]] for [http://openoffice.org OpenOffice].
* To mark a Microsoft Office word document, you can use the Microsoft Office add-ins for [http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=113b53dd-1cc0-4fbe-9e1d-b91d07c76504&displaylang=en Office 2003/XP] or [http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=d1ddbdc8-627f-415a-9b0a-97362bc9b480&displaylang=en Office 2007]

== Marking on Other Sites ==

===[[Publish]]===

One way to increase visibility and access to your work is to share it with an existing community. Many content platforms have already enabled CC licensing, making it easy for you to indicate the license along with other information, such as who to attribute. In addition, search engines like Google and Yahoo! will index your work as CC licensed if the [[metadata]] is properly attached.

[[Publish]] your work in an existing community.

== Marking third-party content in your work ==
Marking best practices also apply for any third party content your work incorporates. If you are incorporating another person's work, then you should be sure you are allowed to incorporate that work. Third party content may be offered under the same or different terms, such as other CC licenses or "all-rights-reserved" copyright. If you are permitted to incorporate that work and it is offered under a CC license, then you should consider adhering to best practices for marking that content as a user, available at [[Marking/Users]]. We also offer additional explanation and tips on [[Marking/Creators/Marking_third_party_content|marking third-party content]].

== Marking in your TOU or TOS ==

== External Links ==
*[http://creativecommons.org.au/marking/examples Marking Examples] explaining metadata from [http://creativecommons.org.au Creative Commons Australia]

== Things to note ==
When marking your work, remember that any restriction or modification to the original license cannot be labeled a 'Creative Commons’ license. See http://creativecommons.org/policies#license.

{{Best Practice}}

[[Category:Marking]]
[[Category:Licensing]]
[[Category:Community]]
[[Category:Media]]
[[Category:HOWTO]]
[[Category:Guide]]

Jurisdiction Database

2012-02-16T10:39:46Z

Nagelstudio: /* Research */

The Jurisdiction Database is a dynamic resource containing information for Affiliates, scholars and others interested in CC's international community.

==Research==
The Database contains the full text of the Unported and the jurisdiction-specific 3.0 licenses, which you can query by a range of variables. The license texts have been structured according to [[Property:Relevant_license_sections|tags or keywords]]. [[Special:RunQuery/Jurisdiction_Query|Query]] one or more ported licenses (and Unported) for tagged [http://reisenferien.blogpaint.com lincense sections].Visit the [[Jurisdiction_Database/Research|Jurisdiction Database Research]] page for more information on using the data contained in this database. Please note that Creative Commons is not beginning any new ports in preparation for the upgrade to version 4.0.

==Jurisdictions==
The CC Affiliate Network consists of 100+ affiliates working in over 70 jurisdictions to support and promote CC activities around the world. Members of the Affiliate Network have formal agreements with Creative Commons. Enthusiasm for Creative Commons does not require a formal Affiliate Team. Creative Commoners around the world conduct events and share the news about CC without a formal relationship to Creative Commons. The flags below cover all jurisdictions included in the Jurisdiction Database, both members of the Affiliate Network and those who do not have formal agreements with CC. Click on the flags below to learn more about CC enthusiasts in these jurisdictions.

For more information on what it means to be a formal Affiliate, please see our [[International|Affiliates]] wiki page and our [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/images/9/94/Introduction_to_CC_and_Affiliate_Teams.pdf| Introduction document].

<div style="margin-left:50px;margin-right:50px; padding:10px;text-align:center;float:left;display:block;">
{{#ask: [[Category:Jurisdictions]]
|?Flag URL
|?Name
|sort=Name
|format=template|template=Jurisdiction List|link=none|limit=100}}
<div style="clear:both;display:none;"></div>
</div>

<div style="clear:both;"></div>
<center>
==Add a jurisdiction==
{{#forminput:form=Jurisdiction|size=30|button text=Add jurisdiction}}
</center>

==Contributing to the Database==
The Jurisdiction Database contains information on the Unported license and each Creative Commons affiliate jurisdiction (e.g. [[Germany]], [[Estonia]]).

On these pages you have the opportunity to add or edit data about the jurisdiction, or data about the jurisdiction's 3.0 license porting process.

On each page, you can choose to edit the page directly as with a normal wiki page or edit via the "edit with form" link at the top of the page. This form will allow you to input information into labeled boxes and is suggested at least for edits to the sidebar.

The structure of pages follows this schema: <Jurisdiction>/3.0/<License>
* Jurisdiction page (e.g. [http://lifestyle.blogpaint.com Germany], Estonia) which has the [[Template:Jurisdiction|template]] and [[Form:Jurisdiction|form]]
* 3.0 page which has [[Template:License|template]] and [[Form:License|form]].
*Specific license page (e.g. CC BY-NC-SA) which has [[Template:Ported License|templates]] and [[Template:License section]] and [[Form:Ported License|form]].

==Map==
{{#ask: [[Category:Jurisdictions]]|?Coordinates|format=openlayers|layers=osm,yahoo,bing,openlayers|height=350|limit=100}}

== Disclaimer ==
{{Infobox|This website provides information about legal topics and information on Creative Commons licenses. It is based on the work of Creative Commons and our Creative Commons Affiliate Teams. Nothing on this website is intended to be used as legal advice. Creative Commons and Creative Commons Affiliate Teams are not law firms and do not provide legal services. Using the Websites or Services or sending us an email does not create an attorney-client relationship. Creative Commons and Creative Commons Affiliate Teams provide this information on an "as-is" basis. Creative Commons makes no warranties regarding any information provided on this website and disclaims liability for damages resulting from their use.}}

__NOEDITSECTION__

[[Category:Database]]

Jurisdiction Database

2012-02-16T10:38:28Z

Nagelstudio: /* Contributing to the Database */

The Jurisdiction Database is a dynamic resource containing information for Affiliates, scholars and others interested in CC's international community.

==Research==
The Database contains the full text of the Unported and the jurisdiction-specific 3.0 licenses, which you can query by a range of variables. The license texts have been structured according to [[Property:Relevant_license_sections|tags or keywords]]. [[Special:RunQuery/Jurisdiction_Query|Query]] one or more ported licenses (and Unported) for tagged license sections. Visit the [[Jurisdiction_Database/Research|Jurisdiction Database Research]] page for more information on using the data contained in this database. Please note that Creative Commons is not beginning any new ports in preparation for the upgrade to version 4.0.

==Jurisdictions==
The CC Affiliate Network consists of 100+ affiliates working in over 70 jurisdictions to support and promote CC activities around the world. Members of the Affiliate Network have formal agreements with Creative Commons. Enthusiasm for Creative Commons does not require a formal Affiliate Team. Creative Commoners around the world conduct events and share the news about CC without a formal relationship to Creative Commons. The flags below cover all jurisdictions included in the Jurisdiction Database, both members of the Affiliate Network and those who do not have formal agreements with CC. Click on the flags below to learn more about CC enthusiasts in these jurisdictions.

For more information on what it means to be a formal Affiliate, please see our [[International|Affiliates]] wiki page and our [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/images/9/94/Introduction_to_CC_and_Affiliate_Teams.pdf| Introduction document].

<div style="margin-left:50px;margin-right:50px; padding:10px;text-align:center;float:left;display:block;">
{{#ask: [[Category:Jurisdictions]]
|?Flag URL
|?Name
|sort=Name
|format=template|template=Jurisdiction List|link=none|limit=100}}
<div style="clear:both;display:none;"></div>
</div>

<div style="clear:both;"></div>
<center>
==Add a jurisdiction==
{{#forminput:form=Jurisdiction|size=30|button text=Add jurisdiction}}
</center>

==Contributing to the Database==
The Jurisdiction Database contains information on the Unported license and each Creative Commons affiliate jurisdiction (e.g. [[Germany]], [[Estonia]]).

On these pages you have the opportunity to add or edit data about the jurisdiction, or data about the jurisdiction's 3.0 license porting process.

On each page, you can choose to edit the page directly as with a normal wiki page or edit via the "edit with form" link at the top of the page. This form will allow you to input information into labeled boxes and is suggested at least for edits to the sidebar.

The structure of pages follows this schema: <Jurisdiction>/3.0/<License>
* Jurisdiction page (e.g. [http://lifestyle.blogpaint.com Germany], Estonia) which has the [[Template:Jurisdiction|template]] and [[Form:Jurisdiction|form]]
* 3.0 page which has [[Template:License|template]] and [[Form:License|form]].
*Specific license page (e.g. CC BY-NC-SA) which has [[Template:Ported License|templates]] and [[Template:License section]] and [[Form:Ported License|form]].

==Map==
{{#ask: [[Category:Jurisdictions]]|?Coordinates|format=openlayers|layers=osm,yahoo,bing,openlayers|height=350|limit=100}}

== Disclaimer ==
{{Infobox|This website provides information about legal topics and information on Creative Commons licenses. It is based on the work of Creative Commons and our Creative Commons Affiliate Teams. Nothing on this website is intended to be used as legal advice. Creative Commons and Creative Commons Affiliate Teams are not law firms and do not provide legal services. Using the Websites or Services or sending us an email does not create an attorney-client relationship. Creative Commons and Creative Commons Affiliate Teams provide this information on an "as-is" basis. Creative Commons makes no warranties regarding any information provided on this website and disclaims liability for damages resulting from their use.}}

__NOEDITSECTION__

[[Category:Database]]

License Versions

2012-02-16T10:36:50Z

Nagelstudio: /* Sui generis rights in databases are waived for uses that do not implicate copyright */

This page identifies some of the improvements to the Creative Commons license suite from the publication of the first licenses in December, 2002, through the current version 3.0, and highlights important similarities among the major license versions released to date. For more information on using CC tools or works offered under Creative Commons licenses, consult the [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions Frequently Asked Questions page.] For a further historical perspective, you may also review defunct CC legal tools at the [http://creativecommons.org/retiredlicenses retired legal tools page].

==License blog posts==
The chart below presents the major license versions, their launch dates, and blog posts announcing public comment periods, the launch of a license suite, and changes to the new licenses. It does not reference the unfinished version 3.x ([http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3.01 3.01], [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3.5 3.5]) licenses, which are not in active discussion and are not expected to be published. Version 3.0 is the recommended and most recently-published Creative Commons license suite; the 3.x license discussions address further potential upgrades and changes that may (or may not) be considered when CC commences discussion on the next [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_4 version 4.0 license]. The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Legalcode_errata Legalcode Errata page], to which you should feel free to contribute, catalogs minor bugs in the licenses such as typographical errors.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! License version*
! Release date
! Call for public comment
! Launch announcement
! Explanation of changes from prior version
|-
| 1.0
| 2002 Dec 16
|
| [http://creativecommons.org/press-releases/entry/3476 Creative Commons Unveils Machine-Readable Copyright Licenses]
|
|-
| 2.0
| 2004 May 25
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3981 Versioning -- Public Review Begins]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 Announcing (and explaining) our new 2.0 licenses]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 Announcing (and explaining) our new 2.0 licenses]
|-
| 2.5
| 2005 June
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5447 Tweaking CC's Standard Attribution Language -- An Invitation to Comment]
|
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5457 Comments Period Drawing to a close for Draft License Version 2.5]
|-
| 3.0
| 2007 Feb 23
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/6017 Version 3.0 -- Public Discussion Launched]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/7249 Version 3.0 Launched]
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3 Creative Commons Version 3.0 Licenses -- A Brief Explanation]
|}

* Note that CC also released a version 2.1 suite for jurisdictions like Spain, Australia and Japan, whose localized ports of the 2.0 suite contained errors.

==International License Development Process==

Creative Commons develops, releases and updates its public copyright licenses (and other legal tools) via an open and inclusive process of engagement with Creative Commons’ global network of attorneys and affiliates, as well as varied communities and constituents, that includes the publication of drafts, formal comment periods and transparent decision-making. This process culminates in the publication of the preferred, most up-to-date set of CC licenses for use around the world. Creative Commons released its latest version of the licenses in February 2007. Those licenses are known as the 3.0 international (also called the 3.0 “unported” and formerly referred to under version 2.0 as the “generic”) license suite.

While each set of licenses produced by CC is drafted to conform with copyright law, many of the improvements to the version 3.0 license suite brought the licenses further into line with international copyright law. Once a suite of licenses is released, Creative Commons grants permission to legal experts around the world under formal agreement to adapt (or “port”) the licenses where necessary to more fully align the text with the laws of different legal jurisdictions and translate the licenses to the local language(s). See our [http://creativecommons.org/international international] page for more information or access the [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database jurisdiction database] to compare the international (unported) licenses and the ported licenses of various jurisdictions.

In each instance, the resulting ported licenses are intended to have the same legal meaning and effect as the international (unported) licenses and the ported licenses of other jurisdictions at the same license version. Porting follows the same open and inclusive processes used to produce the international licenses: publication of drafts, comment periods, engagement with communities and constituents who use the licenses, and transparent decision-making processes. It also involves close oversight and review by CC staff.

==License Suite Versions==

The chart below and linked explanations that follow detail some of the improvements and important similarities among Creative Commons license versions. Some of the explanations contain links to further information on the topic.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! License Suite Version
! 1.0
! 2.0
! 2.5
! 3.0
|-
|'''All international (unported/generic) and ported licenses'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Nomenclature_.28for_unported_licenses.29 Nomenclature (for unported licenses)]
| Generic license
| Generic license
| Generic license
| International (unported) license
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Technical_Measures_by_Licensees_Prohibited Technological measures by users of CC licensed works prohibited]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Attribution_required Attribution required]
| Not all licenses
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Credit_to_others_contemplated Credit to others contemplated]
| No
| No
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Requests_for_removal_of_attribution_contemplated Requests for removal of attribution contemplated]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Collecting_societies_regimes_addressed Collecting societies regimes addressed]
| No
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Representations_and_warranties_by_licensor_included Representations and warranties by licensor included]
| Yes
| No
| No
| No
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#.22No_endorsement.22_clause_included "No endorsement" clause included]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Moral_rights_clause_included Moral rights clause included]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Adaptations_.28if_allowed.29_must_be_marked_as_such Adaptations (if allowed) must be marked as such]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Definition_of_.22NonCommercial.22_unchanged_.28same_in_all_versions.29 Definition of "NonCommercial" (has remained unchanged in all versions)]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Use_of_licenses_for_copyrightable_compilations_of_data_anticipated Use of licenses for copyrightable compilations of data anticipated]
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (explicit)
|-
| '''International (unported/generic) ShareAlike licenses'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Compatible_licenses_may_be_used_for_adaptations_of_works_originally_offered_under_CC_ShareAlike_licenses Compatible licenses may be used for adaptations of works originally offered under CC ShareAlike licenses]
| No
| CC only
| CC only
| Yes
|-
| '''Licenses ported to jurisdictions with sui generis rights'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Sui_generis_rights_in_databases_are_waived_for_uses_that_do_not_implicate_copyright Sui generis rights in databases are waived for uses that do not implicate copyright]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|}

==Nomenclature (for unported licenses)==

Before the launch of the version 3.0 licenses, the international (unported) licenses were called the “generic” licenses. The generic licenses were drafted to conform with U.S. law and conventions. Starting with version 3.0, Creative Commons [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#Further_Internationalization drafted its core suite of licenses to conform to relevant international treaties and drafting conventions]. In this sense, the version 3.0 international (unported) license suite is jurisdiction-agnostic: it does not mention nor is it drafted against any particular jurisdiction's laws or statutes, but rather it is intended to function without adjustment in all jurisdictions around the world. You may [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database access the jurisdiction database] and compare the international (unported) license to the ported licenses of various jurisdictions.

==Technical Measures by Licensees Prohibited==

All CC license versions prohibit licensees (as opposed to licensors) from using effective technological measures such as “digital rights management” software to restrict the ability of those who receive a CC licensed work from a licensee to exercise rights granted under the license. To be clear, encryption or an access limitation is not necessarily a technical protection measure prohibited by the licenses. For example, content sent via email and encrypted with the recipient's public key does not restrict use of the work by the recipient. Likewise, limiting recipients to a set of users (e.g., with a username and password) does not restrict use of the work by the recipients. In the cases above, encryption or an access limitation does not violate the prohibition on technological measures because the recipient is not prevented from exercising all rights granted by the license (including rights of further redistribution).

[http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#Debian This treatment was re-evaluated during the public process leading to release of the version 3.0 license suite.] CC considered arguments in favor of such measures, coupled with an obligation of parallel distribution. However, those arguments were ultimately rejected.

==Attribution required==
The version 1.0 suite is unique because it contains some CC licenses that do not require attribution. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 All subsequent license suites make attribution a standard requirement] unless the licensor specifies otherwise. The required mode of attribution differs slightly among the versions, and is progressively more flexible with each subsequent version.

==Credit to others contemplated==

Prior to the version 2.5 suite, CC licenses contemplated crediting the author only. Versions 2.5 and 3.0 [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5447 allow licensors to identify another party or organization for attribution], called the “Attribution Party.” This feature was introduced in part to alleviate burdensome or difficult attribution situations, such as may be the case when many people contribute to a wiki article or other multi-author, collaborative effort. In versions 2.5 and 3.0, licensors may designate another party for attribution purposes -- such as a sponsor institute, publishing entity or journal -- in addition to or instead of the author. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5457 You may review some of the concerns raised when CC proposed this change].

==Requests for removal of attribution contemplated==

All license versions after version 1.0 require attribution. However, legislation in many countries gives authors the right to control the use of their name in association with their works. Therefore, CC licenses require licensees to remove (otherwise required) attribution to the creator from collections or adaptations to the extent practicable at the creator’s request.

==Collecting societies regimes addressed==
Many users of Creative Commons licenses are also members of collective rights societies like ASCAP and BMI, which manage copyright on behalf of owners. Every version from the 2.0 suite onward contains clauses that account for the existence of those arrangements. They provide, for instance, that for works offered under a NonCommercial license, the licensor retains the right to collect royalties for commercial uses of the work. The [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 structure of the provisions in the 2.x licenses] (2.0, 2.1 and 2.5) differs from that in the version 3.0 licenses. The 2.x licenses specifically regulate music, sound recordings and webcasting. As those licenses were ported to different jurisdictions, those provisions were adjusted to conform to the local collecting society situation.
The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#International_Harmonization_.E2.80.94_Collecting_Societies version 3.0 licenses employ a broad, harmonized strategy to collective rights societies]. This strategy still allows jurisdictions to adopt an approach that best aligns with local law and society structure, but also ensures that the approach is implemented consistently across jurisdictions. In the international (unported) license, as regards compulsory royalty collection, the licensor reserves the right to collect those royalties in jurisdictions in which collection cannot be waived. In those jurisdictions in which compulsory royalty collection can be waived, the right to collect royalties is waived completely for those licenses that permit commercial use and reserved for commercial uses in those licenses that permit NonCommercial use only. For voluntary royalty schema, the licensor reserves the right to collect royalties for commercial uses in those licenses that permit NonCommercial use only, and completely waives the right to collect such royalties for licenses permitting commercial use. This clause covers both individual royalty collection and, in the event that the licensor is a member of a collecting society that collects such royalties, collection via such societies. Some affiliates porting the [http://www.nagelstudiohamburg.net version 3.0] licenses to interface with local collective rights regimes have chosen to include only those clauses which address the particular situation in the jurisdiction. Others have adopted all the language from the international (unported) license in hopes of international [http://www.nagelstudio-hamburg.net harmonization], or out of concern that their jurisdiction’s regime may change. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

==Representations and warranties by licensor included==

In the 1.0 license suite, the licensor extends warranties, for instance that the work does not infringe the work of another. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 These warranties were eliminated in all subsequent license versions.] All post-version 1.0 suites explicitly offer the work “AS IS” and disclaim all liabilities. Notwithstanding, some ports have included warranties where required under local law. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

=="No endorsement" clause included==

While attribution is required in all licenses post-version 1.0, a licensee may not provide credit in a way that suggests endorsement or sponsorship by the licensor. In some jurisdictions, wrongfully implying that an author, publisher or anyone else endorses a particular use of a work may be unlawful. While this has always been the case, [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#MIT the version 3.0 licenses for the first time explicitly prohibit endorsement or sponsorship without the consent of the licensor].

==Moral rights clause included==

While the existence and extent of moral rights differ by jurisdiction, the most consistently present rights are those of attribution and integrity (the right to prevent or halt the prejudicial use of one’s work by another). The 1.0 and 2.x generic licenses were drafted to conform to U.S. law, and because U.S. law recognizes moral rights in only very limited circumstances, the generic versions of those licenses suites do not address moral rights of authors.

Reflecting the global, harmonized approach of the version 3.0 license suite, [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#International_Harmonization_.E2.80.93_Moral_Rights CC addressed the issue clearly in the international (unported) licenses]. Since moral rights are not waivable in most jurisdictions, CC did not include a waiver of those rights in the international licenses. Instead, the licenses specifically instruct users that they “must not distort, mutilate, modify or take other derogatory action in relation to the Work which would be prejudicial to the Original Author's honor or reputation.” This mandate forbids licensees from making uses that would otherwise violate authors’ moral rights of integrity. The attribution requirement is intended to satisfy the right of attribution. In the porting process, some jurisdictions slightly adjust this provision with CC’s permission to specify that moral rights are waived to the extent necessary to effect the license to the degree a waiver is possible under applicable law. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

==Adaptations (if allowed) must be marked as such==

Beginning with the 3.0 license suite, licenses that permit the creation of adaptations require licensees to take reasonable steps to label the work as such. For instance, the adaptation could include a notice to the effect that, “The original work has been modified.”

==Definition of "NonCommercial" unchanged (same in all versions)==
While Creative Commons’ licenses have evolved over time, the scope of permitted uses under the NonCommercial (“NC”) licenses has remained unchanged across all license suites. The [http://nagelstudio.blogage.de NonCommercial] clause prohibits the exercise of rights granted under the NC license “in any manner that is primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation.” Creative Commons carried out a [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/17127 study on the NonCommerical clause and users’ understandings]. However, the exact meaning of the clause is still debated.

==Use of licenses for copyrightable compilations of data anticipated==
Creative Commons licenses may be used with all copyrightable works (note that CC does not recommend its licenses for use with computer software). Such works include compilations of data that exhibit the requisite level of creativity for copyright protection under applicable national law. Thus, to the extent compilations of data are protected by copyright, Creative Commons licenses are suitable licenses for exercising that right. For the avoidance of doubt, version 3.0 licenses explicitly include such compilations in the definition of “work.”

==Compatible licenses may be used for adaptations of works originally offered under CC ShareAlike licenses==

Users of works licensed under CC’s ShareAlike licenses must make adaptations and collections of those works available under the same terms and conditions. The version 1.0 licenses require that the adaptations be distributed under exactly the same license as was applied to the original work. Starting with the release of the [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 2.x license suites, CC expanded compatibility] by allowing adaptations to be licensed under the same or later version of the original license, including other ported versions of the same or later-version of the license. The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#BY-SA_.E2.80.94_Compatibility_Structure_Introduced 3.0 Attribution-ShareAlike goes one step further], by allowing adaptations of works licensed under its terms to be licensed under a “Creative Commons Compatible License,” defined to mean licenses approved by CC as essentially equivalent to the 3.0 Attribution-ShareAlike license. To date, CC has not approved any other licenses. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/8213 You may also review CC’s statement of intent for ShareAlike licenses].

==Sui generis rights in databases are waived for uses that do not implicate copyright==

A few early (2.0, 2.5) European jurisdiction CC license ports licensed database rights along with copyright.

Although the generic and international (unported) license suites do not mention sui generis rights, starting with the version 3.0 licenses, CC established a [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/images/f/f6/V3_Database_Rights.pdf policy for how those rights are addressed in ported licenses in those jurisdictions where sui generis rights exist.] The policy provides that version [http://blogya.de/urlaubferien 3.0 EU jurisdiction] ports must license sui generis rights subject to the terms and conditions of the license just like copyrights and neighboring rights, but also must waive license requirements and prohibitions (attribution, share-alike, etc) for uses triggering database rights — so that if the use of a database published under a CC license implicated only database rights, but not copyright, the CC license requirements and prohibitions would not apply to that use. The license requirements and prohibitions, however, continue to apply to all uses triggering copyright. Other ports and the unported license are silent on database rights: databases and data are licensed (i.e., subject to restrictions detailed in the license) to the extent copyrightable, and if data in the database or the database itself are not copyrightable the license restrictions do not apply to those parts (though they still apply to the remainder). Thus, regardless of the [http://www.nagelstudio-harburg.com CC 3.0] license at play (unported, an EU port, another port), uses which implicate only database rights will not trigger the license conditions, while uses which implicate copyright will.
In addition, the policy precludes exportation of the sui generis rights to jurisdictions where such rights are not recognized through inclusion of a territoriality limitation, thereby avoiding the imposition of restrictions based on sui generis rights via contract where those rights are not enforceable or recognized. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

Version 3

2012-02-16T10:33:17Z

Nagelstudio: /* BY-SA — Compatibility Structure Introduced */

= Creative Commons Version 3.0 Licenses — A Brief Explanation =

===''by Mia Garlick, General Counsel Creative Commons''===

Since April 2005, Creative Commons has been working on versioning up its core licensing suite. The Creative Commons licenses (For an overview of the licenses, ''see:'' [http://creativecommons.org/about/licenses/meet-the-licenses]) serve as an important vehicle by which many millions of creators clearly signal to the world that they are happy for members of the public to engage in some of the exciting new uses of content that are made possible by digital technologies. Using a CC license, an artist can, for example, invite the public to share their work or mash it up (on certain conditions).

A distinctive feature of CC’s licensing infrastructure is ensuring that it is comprehensible to both humans (the Commons Deed) and machines (the metadata) as well as enforceable in a court of law (the Legal Code, which is the actual license). But another important aspect of the CC licensing system is to ensure that it respected by the community of people who apply our licenses to their content, who use CC-licensed content and who are committed to enabling free culture.

Creative Commons regularly invites and receives feedback about its licenses and how they may be able to be improved to better serve the people who use them and who use CC-licensed content. Obviously, all things can be improved with the benefit of hindsight and experience; also, the environment within which CC licenses are used is always changing. When CC first released its licenses, for example, the use of video and video-sharing sites had not yet been deployed, let alone used to the extent they are today.

We released version 1.0 of our licenses in December 2002 (''See'' CC Weblog, Creative Commons Launches, December 15, 2002, [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3484]). Like software releases, we track the different licenses by version. In May 2004, we versioned to 2.0 (''See'' CC Weblog, Announcing (and explaining) our new 2.0 licenses, May 25, 2004, [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216]) and then made a minor tweak to the attribution clause in June 2005 (''See'' CC Weblog, Comments Period Drawing to a Close for Draft License Version 2.5, May 29, 2006, [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5457]) and versioned to 2.5. Now, CC is versioning to 3.0. We announced a timetable for versioning to 3.0 back in May 2006 (''See'' Mia Garlick, ‘Getting to Version 3.0,’ May 17, 2006, [http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2006-May/003557.html]); and we have followed the consultation process in the timetable even though the schedule itself has been considerably delayed while we take account of all of the different interest groups that are relevant to CC licenses.

==Background to Version 3.0==

The process of versioning to 3.0 began back around April 2005 as part of discussions with Debian [http://www.debian.org/] and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) [http://mit.edu/] about ways to improve the clarity of our licenses. Although discussions with Debian and MIT initiated consideration of a new license version, ultimately, version 3.0 grew to be about much more than these two projects — it focused on internationalizing the “generic” license and international harmonization of the CC licenses. Additionally, it expanded to encompass Creative Commons' long-held vision [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5709] of establishing a compatibility structure to allow interoperability between different flexible content copyright licenses.

===''Debian''===

As you may know, Debian describes itself as “an association of individuals who have made common cause to create a free operating system” [http://www.us.debian.org/intro/about] and the volunteer group has worked together to create an operating system called Debian GNU/Linux. The project and all developers working on the project adhere to the Debian Social Contract [http://www.us.debian.org/social_contract]. The Debian Free Software Guidelines (DSFG) [http://www.us.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines] form part of the Debian Social Contract and define the criteria for “free software” and so what software is permissible in the distribution.

One part of the Debian community is debian-legal [http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/] — a mailing list whose members provide “guidance for the Debian project on, among other things, the acceptability of software and other content for inclusion in the Debian operating system.” [http://people.debian.org/~evan/ccsummary.html] They work primarily involves reviewing software against the DFSG to determine if the packages constitute “free software” per the DFSG. Contributors to the Debian project can then take these determination into account when making decisions about what to include in individual packages.

From time to time the debian-legal list provides a review of a well-known software license to express a rough consensus opinion on whether software released solely under the license would satisfy the definition of “free software” according to the DSFG. Although these summaries are not binding, they do provide some basis for the Debian project to make decisions about individual packages. Although debian-legal work primarily in reviewing software programs and Creative Commons licenses are not designed for software, debian-legal notes that the:

“Creative Commons licenses are still of interest to the Debian project. Debian includes documentation for programs, and many programs included in Debian use digital data such as images, sounds, video, or text that are included with the programs in Debian.” (''Id.'')

Consequently, debian-legal reviewed the CC licenses and concluded that none of the Creative Commons core licensees were free according to the DFSG and recommended that works released under these license “should not be included in Debian.” (''Id.'')

It is clear that the licenses that contain a NonCommercial or a NoDerivatives restriction (e.g. Attribution-NonCommercial, Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike, Attribution-NoDerivatives, Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives ) will never be able to comply with the DFSG because these violate basic principles articulate in the DSFG — specifically, DSFG 1 which requires that a licensee be able to sell copies of the work, DSFG 3 which requires a license to permit the making of derivative works and DSFG 6 which proscribes discrimination against any field of endeavor.

====DRM====

But this should still leave the CC Attribution and Attribution-ShareAlike licenses as DSFG-compliant. On reviewing debian-legal’s issues with these licenses, it seemed clear to Creative Commons that, for the most part, minor amendments and clarifications to the licenses should be able to address debian-legal’s concerns. (For an outline of these concerns, see [http://people.debian.org/~evan/ccsummary]) One topic, however, that was not minor and proved to be much debated as part of the version 3.0 license discussions was the anti-TPM clause in the CC licenses; TPM being technological protection measures such as encryption which have received legal protection in many jurisdictions around the world, which make it a civil (and sometimes) a criminal offence to circumvent these measures.

The Creative Commons licenses prohibit a licensee applying a TPM to a licensed work that restricts the rights granted under the license. (''See e.g.,'' clause 4(a) “You may not distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or publicly digitally perform the Work with any technological measures that control access or use of the Work in a manner inconsistent with the terms of this License Agreement.” of the CC Attribution license ([http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/legalcode])) In essence, this clause is intended to ensure that a person cannot exercise the freedoms granted by a CC license to apply technologies that restrict those freedoms for others.

In Debian’s view, this prohibition violates DSFG #1 because it prevents a licensee from being able to distribute works in the format of their choice. The consequence of this is that CC-licensed content cannot, for example, be included by a licensee in a Sony Playstation game or other platforms that exist on TPM.

An important thing to note, however, is that this limitation only applied to CC licensees. CC licensors are of course free to license their works on a Sony or other TPM-ed platform whilst also CC licensing it. One example of this is the Beastie Boys track ‘Now Get Busy’ that appeared on the WIRED CD under a CC Sampling license [http://creativecommons.org/wired] but was then also made available on iTunes [http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewAlbum?playlistId=15146499&selectedItemId=15146497&s=143441 ].

To avoid interfering with the freedom of the licensed content and allowing a licensee to lock up the content on a TPM-ed platform, Debian proposed that CC’s so-called “anti-TPM” provision to allow a licensee to distribute the CC-licensed work in any format, including a TPM-ed format, provided that the license distributed the work in at least one format that did not restrict another person’s exercise of rights under the license. This proposal became known as the “parallel distribution” proposal.

Creative Commons initially agreed to include the parallel distribution proposal as part of the discussion draft for the Version 3.0 amendments. The rationale for this initial acceptance was that it could accommodate the objectives of the anti-TPM clause (being free culture) whilst also addressing Debian’s concerns that people be free to create works for distribution on TPM-ed platforms.

The parallel distribution proposal did not, however, survive discussions with the Creative Commons International affiliates [http://creativecommons.org/worldwide/]. The affiliates are responsible for “porting” the CC licenses to their local jurisdiction (discussed in greater detail below) and for fielding a wide range of questions about CC licenses and their implementation in various projects throughout the world. Based on their experience with the diverse communities that use and rely on CC licenses and explaining the licenses to different constituencies, the CCi affiliates were strongly opposed to the introduction of a parallel distribution scenario for various reasons, including: (1) the lack of demonstrated use cases showing a strong need among CC licensees for this kind of an exception to the existing “anti-TPM” language; (2) risks of unduly complicating the licenses which defeats alot of the purpose of CC licenses, namely to be simple and easy to use and to understand; and, (3) the strong opposition to technological protection measures in general by many in the CC community.

CC did, however, include the parallel distribution proposal as part of the public license discussions when those were launched in August 2006 (''See'' Mia Garlick, Version 3.0 – Public Discussion, August 9, 2006, [http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2006-August/003855.html]) so that the community on those lists could debate the merits of the proposal.

The discussions about the parallel distribution proposal on the cc-licenses email list were very intense. Various participants argued in favor of the parallel distribution amendment on the grounds that the “anti-TPM” clause violated DSFG #1 and achieved little, if anything. Taking the advantage of a Sony Playstation again, if CC-licensed content cannot be included in games for the PS2 platform, the CC licensee is restricted in what they can do with the content, the PS2 gamer cannot play a game with CC-licensed content and Sony are unlikely to notice the absence of this content and will continue along as business as usual with a TPM-ed platform, irrespective of any anti-TPM ban in the CC licenses.

When asked about the extent to which there was a demonstrated need by developers (as licensees) to be able to utilize CC-licensed content in TPM-ed environments, advocates of the parallel distribution amendment argued that it was better to address the problem before a need arose.

However, the overall tenor of the cc-licenses list discussions tended not to favor adoption of the parallel distribution proposal. There was concern that if parallel distribution were permitted in the CC licenses this would reinforce, if not expand, a platform monopoly enjoyed by a TPM-ed platform that only allows the playing of TPM-ed content (''See'' Greg London, Re:Subject: Version 3.0 – List Discussion Responses, September 28, 2006, [http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2006-September/004130.html]; ''see also,'' Terry Hancock, Debian and Creative Commons, October 18, 2006, at [http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/blogs/debian_and_the_creative_commons]). Other concerns were voiced that the non-TPMed copy may not be able to played as well as the TPM-ed copy and, generally, that the community was not in favor of supporting a TPM option at this stage (For an overview of the discussions, ''see ''the discussion archives for August [http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2006-August/thread.html], September [http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2006-September/thread.html] and October [http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2006-October/thread.html].)

Whether Debian now declare the CC Attribution and Attribution-ShareAlike licenses to be free according to the DSFG or not — given all negotiated amendments are included in version 3.0 with the exception of the parallel distribution provision — remains an open question.

Certainly, Debian voted (''See'' ‘General Resolution: Why the GNU Free Documentation License is not suitable for Debian main, [http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_001]). earlier in 2006 to allow works licensed under the Free Documentation License to be used in Debian projects. The vote specifically says that the anti-TPM clause in the FDL does not render the FDL incompatible with the DSFG. However, it is not clear whether this treatment is an exception or will also enable the CC Attribution and Attribution-ShareAlike license to also be held to be compatible with the DSFG.

===''MIT''===

With MIT, their OpenCourseWare (OCW) project [http://ocw.mit.edu/index.html] was initially launched in September 2002 prior to the formal release of the Creative Commons core licensing suite in December 2002 and thus, used an early version of the Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike license. “OpenCourseWare” is the free and open digital publication of high quality educational materials, organized as courses. Flexible licenses such as Creative Commons licenses are key to enabling the openness of these materials.

MIT’s OpenCourseWare project has initiated a global opencourseware movement. Most recently, the OpenCourseWare Consortium [http://ocwconsortium.org/] has been formed which involves the collaboration of more than 100 higher education institutions and associated organizations from around the world — including China, France, Japan, the UK, the USA and Vietnam — who are committed to creating a broad and deep body of open educational content using a shared model.

Given CC licenses have improved over time, both CC and MIT wanted to work together to address any issues MIT had about the CC licenses so that MIT could switch over to a more recent version of the CC BY-NC-SA license. However, a key concern for MIT, given its illustrious reputation, is to ensure that when people translate and locally adapt MIT content under the terms of the BY-NC-SA license, they make it clear that they are doing so under the terms of the license and not as a result of a special relationship between MIT and that person — essentially, a “No Endorsement” clause.

Given “No Endorsement” clauses are a standard feature of free and open source software, CC felt that it would be easy issue to make this express in the CC licenses. In CC’s view, a licensee should not interpret the attribution requirement of the CC licenses as a basis (whether intentionally or not) to misrepresent the nature of the relationship with the licensor. Certainly, in most jurisdictions laws other than copyright law will proscribe this misconduct by a licensee. But CC agreed with MIT that it was useful to make this express in the license — both to give the licensor comfort and to ensure that the licensee was under no misapprehensions.

This feedback from both Debian and MIT was the impetus for CC commencing the version 3.0 process. However, as many projects do — versioning to 3.0 rapidly developed to encompass new and additional issues. These issues can effectively be described as further internationalization and international harmonization of the CC licenses

==Further Internationalization==

When CC’s core licensing suite was first released in December 2002, the licenses were drafted based on US copyright law and referred to as the “generic” license because the license did not identify a specific jurisdiction or governing law to apply to the interpretation of the license. Towards the end of 2003, Creative Commons launched its license internationalization project [http://creativecommons.org/international/], which involves the “porting” of the generic licenses to different jurisdictions around the world.

Since this project started, the CC core licenses have been “ported” to over 45 jurisdictions around the world to countries as diverse as Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Croatia, China, France, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, South Africa and South Korea. (''Id.'')

While the internationalization has taken off far beyond Creative Commons’ expectations and has demonstrated the amazing energy around the globe for a more flexible and permissive copyright licensing approach, two issues arose.

The first is that as Creative Commons’ license internationalization project continued to grow, the “generic” license and the US license were one and the same. For the casual visitor to the CC International page (''Id.''), it seemed that the licenses had not been “ported” to the US, when in fact they had started out there. The challenge becomes though — if CC recognizes a specific US license, on what law should the “generic” license be based?

The approach Creative Commons adopted to respond this issue required further internationalization of our licenses. We decided to spin off the “generic” license to be a US license and recraft the “generic” license to have it utilize the language of the international intellectual property treaties, in place of the language of US copyright law.

The new license relies on the language of the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works [http://wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/berne/], the Rome Convention of 1961 [http://wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/rome/], the WIPO Copyright Treaty of 1996 [http://wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/wct/], the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty of 1996 [http://wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/wppt/] and the Universal Copyright Convention [http://www.unesco.org/culture/laws/copyright/html_eng/page1.shtml ]. Because treaties are matters of international agreement between countries and, as a general rule, require adoption into national law to be effective in a particular country, simply basing the license wording on these treaties is not, of itself, sufficient. Consequently, clause 8(f) of the new generic specifically provides that the license takes effect according to the corresponding provisions of the implementation of those treaty provisions in the applicable national law.

To reflect the nature of the new “generic” license we also decided to change its name to “unported.” This description is intended to highlight the different nature of the new generic license and to utilize the “porting” terminology that Creative Commons has been using in its license internationalization project since its launch in 2003 to more clearly illustrate the nature of the license that has not been adapted for a local jurisdiction.

The result of this further internationalization is that CC will now offer both an “unported” license and a US license, in addition to the 45-plus ported licenses; the unported license can be selected by those creators to whose jurisdiction CC has not yet ported a license.

===''International Harmonization – Moral Rights''===

The second more major issue that arose through the porting process was that different jurisdictions had different approaches to issues relating to moral rights and collecting societies.

Moral rights, to describe them briefly, are author’s right that are distinct from the economic copyright that can be bought and sold (''See generally,'' [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_rights]). Moral rights recognize an author’s personal attachment to their creativity and seek to protect that connection.

While there can be many different moral rights depending on the jurisdiction, the two main ones that are consistently present in most countries around the globe are the moral right of attribution and the moral right of integrity (''See ''Article 6bis of the Berne Convention (as amended September 1979) [http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/berne/trtdocs_wo001.html#P123_20726]). Obviously, since attribution became a default CC license characteristic with version 2.0 there is less of an issue regarding the moral right of attribution.

However, the moral right of integrity presents a more complex issue for Creative Commons licenses. CC licenses are intended to enable and promote reuse of creative content, particularly the making of derivative works. And those copyright owners who use CC licenses have acknowledged this with over two-thirds of CC licensors consistently choosing to allow derivative works.

But the moral right of integrity, as a general rule, gives the author of a creative work the right to object to alterations or mutilations of the work that are prejudicial to their reputation or honor. Obviously, this has potential to impact the freedom to exercise the right to make derivatives — a derivative will likely always qualify as an alteration of the original work and there may be some instances where it is arguable that it is prejudicial to the original author’s reputation or honor.

Obviously, the first generic version 1.0 license suite released in December 2002 did not mention moral rights because it was based on US copyright law and US copyright law only grants very limited moral rights to works of fine art. However, as the CC licenses began the porting process to other countries, it became necessary for CC licenses to address the moral right of integrity.

To do so, the Creative Commons licenses, with one exception, have taken the approach of not interfering with the author’s moral right of integrity in those jurisdictions that recognize this right.

The one exception is in Canada where the moral right of integrity is waivable. Because Canada was one of the first ten countries to port the CC licenses and one of the first (if not the only) to have a waivable moral right of integrity, on advice of our local affiliate, the CC Canada licenses choose to waive the right of integrity in order to ensure that the licensor’s intention in choosing to permit derivative works was not compromised. However, in all other CC licenses for jurisdictions that recognize the moral right of integrity, the right was retained albeit in different forms; again, on advice from local affiliates.

For example, in most European jurisdictions, the right was expressly retained in the Legal Code because of the strong level of protection for the right in these jurisdictions, as evidenced by the fact that courts would take a dim view of a license that did not expressly include it. In most Latin American jurisdictions, the license was not expressly retained in the Legal Code on the rationale that courts would read it in the license. In Japan, the moral right of integrity was retained in those licenses that prohibited derivative works but not fully retained in those licenses that permit derivative works. The local CC Japan team recommended this approach because the moral right of integrity can be interpreted so broadly as to render any change or alteration to the original work a violation of the right.

Although there is overall consistency in the treatment of the moral right of integrity at the Legal Code level (with the exception of Canada) among the CC licenses, now that the licenses have been ported to over 30 jurisdictions, we felt that it was time to harmonize the approach to this issue at both the Legal Code level and the Commons Deed level. The different approaches towards recognizing the right of integrity in the CC licenses arose because, as CC engaged in the novel process of license porting, we became familiar with the different treatment of this right in different jurisdictions. With the benefit of experience with more than 30 different treatments, CC now felt comfortable to adopt a unified approach.

As a consequence, as part of version 3.0 all CC licenses for jurisdictions that recognize the moral right of integrity will expressly retain that right in the Legal Code to the extent that this is feasible given the status of derivative works under the license. In those jurisdictions in which retention of the moral right of integrity may be completely block exercise of the derivative works right (ie. in Japan) the right will be tempered to the extent necessary to enable the exercise of the derivative works right in a manner intended by the licensor.

In addition, because of the importance of the moral right of integrity in protecting both the author’s rights and for its impact on the derivative works right, from version 3.0 the CC Commons Deeds will clearly state that the author retains their moral rights.

===International Harmonization — Collecting Societies===

Collecting societies are organizations that are established either by private agreements between copyright owners or by copyright law (''See generally,'' [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collecting_society]). Societies license works and process royalty payments from various individuals and groups who use copyrighted works either as part of a statutory scheme (compulsory schemes) or by entering into an agreement with the copyright owner to represent the owners interests when dealing with licensees and potential licensees (voluntary schemes). The rationale underlying societies is that it is more efficient and effective for copyright holders to be represented collectively in negotiating and levying license fees.

CC licenses also contained different treatments of whether and how a licensor can collect royalties via collecting societies because of the differences in the status of collecting societies amongst different jurisdictions.

In the United States, where the CC licenses originated, an artist can be a member of a collecting society and use CC licenses for those of their works that suit them. This is because of the rigorous enforcement of antitrust laws in the US during the early 20th century that requires that US collecting societies take a non-exclusive license from artists. This allows artists to then engage in direct licensing, including via CC licenses, to their fans and others who wish to share and remix their music.

Consequently, in the original CC licenses language was introduced into the licenses as part of version 2.0 to clarify what was considered to be the obvious interaction between CC licenses and collecting society membership. This initial approach stated that under those licenses that permitted commercial use (Attribution, Attribution-NoDerivatives and Attribution-ShareAlike) the licensor waived the right to collect both compulsory and voluntary royalties. Under those licenses that permitted noncommercial use only, the licensor reserved the right to collect royalties for any uses that were commercial in nature but otherwise authorized royalty-free noncommercial use of the work under the CC license. This approach reflected the fact that by choosing to apply a CC license to their work, a CC licensor clearly intends to permit “free” (as in both price and freedom) uses under the terms of the applicable CC license.

However, the situation regarding collecting society membership in many other jurisdictions around the world is remarkably different to the US position. Elsewhere, collecting societies take either an assignment of copyright ownership or an exclusive license to a work of the rights that they represent (which tends to include all of the works an artist creates). This means, for the most part, that an artist cannot directly license their works online, including via CC licenses. The consequence of this is that artists who use CC licenses cannot receive voluntary royalties collected by a society because they are not able to become a member of the society.

Thus, the treatment of collecting society royalties in the CC licenses differed according to the jurisdiction — in many jurisdictions the collection of voluntary royalties was not mentioned so as not to give any misleading impression that membership of a collecting society was possible for a CC licensor. In addition, many CC licenses retained the right to collect compulsory royalties in all licenses, both those that permitted commercial use and those that permit noncommercial use only, because of the advice of local affiliates that local law would not permit the waiver of such a right.

In version 3.0, after the benefit of seeing the different permutations of collecting society membership in over 30 countries and having had a dedicated team working on the issue of the interaction of CC licenses and collecting society membership for more than a year, CC has decided to harmonize the treatment of collecting societies in the CC licenses.

The harmonized approach still allows different jurisdictions to adopt an approach towards collective royalty collection that suits their jurisdiction but ensures that this is consistently applied across jurisdictions. Specifically, as regards compulsory royalty collection, the licensor will reserve the right to collect these royalties in those jurisdictions in which this cannot be waived. In those jurisdictions in compulsory royalty collection can be waived, it will be waived completely for those licenses that permit commercial use and reserved only for commercial uses in those licenses that permit noncommercial use only.

For voluntary royalties, the licensor will reserve the right to collect this “in the event that they are a member of a collecting society” that collects such royalties. This then allows for those jurisdictions in which an artist can be a member of a collecting society and use CC licenses. It also allows for flexibility for those artists who are members of collecting societies and use CC licenses anyway or if in future collecting society membership structures do allow some use of CC licenses, to also enjoy the benefits of their membership if their collecting society moves towards being able to collect for commercial uses of CC-licensed works.

==BY-SA — Compatibility Structure Introduced==

A final change incorporated into Version 3.0 is that the CC BY-SA 3.0 licenses now include a compatibility structure that will enable CC to certify particular licenses, stewarded by other organizations similarly committed to promoting a freer culture, as being compatible with the CC BY-SA. Once certified as compatible [http://creativecommons.org/compatiblelicenses], licensees of both the BY-SA 3.0 and the certified CC compatible license will be able to relicense derivatives under either license (eg., under either the BY-SA or the certified CC compatible license).

Creative Commons CEO Lawrence Lessig first outlined the vision of allowing an ecology of flexible content licenses to flourish in November 2005 (''See'' CC in Review: Lawrence Lessig on Compatibility, [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5709]). As Lessig explained:

"Even if all the creative work you want to remix is licensed under a copyleft license, because those licenses are different licenses, you can’t take creative work from one, and remix it in another. Wikipedia, for example, is licensed under the FDL. It requires derivatives be licensed under the FDL only. And the same is true of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license that governs Opsound content, as well as much of the creativity within Flickr. All of these licenses were written without regard to the fundamental value of every significant advance in the digital age — interoperability."

This incompatibility also serves as a barrier to dual licensing works under the FDL and [http://hotels-ferienhaus.blogage.de CC BY-SA] (''See'' Evan Prodromou, Derivatives of dual-licensed Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike and GFDL works, May 3, 2005 [http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2005-May/002265.html]).

Simply put, the problem is that any license with a "ShareAlike" or similar copyleft provision requires that any derivatives be licensed under exactly the same license (or family of licenses) as the original. This means that an article about Rio de Janeiro on Wikipedia [http://wikipedia.org/] (which is currently licensed under the FDL) cannot be mixed with an article about Rio on Wikitravel [http://wikitravel.org/en/Main_Page] (which is currently licensed under the CC BY-SA 1.0). Even if a project were dual licensed, none of the derivatives of the project could be returned back to the dual-licensed project (because they must be licensed under one ''or'' the other license), thus causing "project bleed." The result of the ShareAlike or "copyleft" license terms is seemingly antithetical to the very purpose of the licenses that contain them. Content, rather than being "free" to remix, is instead locked within particular licensing systems.

Consequently, CC has been working to ensure that, to again quote Lessig:

"[C]reative work[s] will more easily be able to move from one license to another, as creativity is remixed. And this ability for creative work to move to compatible free licenses will provide a market signal about which licenses are deemed more stable, or reliable, by the free licensing community. Free culture will no longer be ghettoized within a particular free license. It will instead be able to move among all relevantly compatible licenses. And the world of “autistic freedom” that governs much of the free software world will be avoided in the free culture world."

There are several obvious candidates for compatibility with the [http://lifestyle.blogpaint.com CC BY-SA]. The Free Art License [http://artlibre.org/licence/lal/en/] and the Free Software Foundation's Free Documentation License (FDL) [http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html].

Creative Commons' initial work has focused on achieving compatibility with the FDL. As part of this work, CC explored the possibility of introducing one-way compatibility with the FDL. (''See'' Discussion Draft — Proposed License Amendment to Avoid Content Ghettos in the Commons [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5701]), which generated some discussion. CC then responded to some of the concerns raised by this discussion [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5731] but ultimately concluded that one-way comaptibility with the FDL was not possible because CC licensors could not be guaranteed the same protections under the FDL that they enjoyed under the CC BY-SA.

Despite the inability to implement one-way compatibility with the [http://hamburgnagelstudio.wordpress.com FDL], Creative Commons is still hopeful of being able to announce licenses that effect the same freedoms as the CC BY-SA to be compatible with the CC BY-SA at some date in the future. To allow the compatibility negotiations to occur separate and apart from the timing of the license versioning process, we have included a structure for certifying licenses as compatible with CC BY-SA as part of Version 3.0 (''See'' Version 3.0 — It's Happening & With BY-SA Compatibility Language Too [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/7234]).

==Summary of Links==

The following list provides the CC blog posts that relate to Version 3.0:

* Getting to Version 3.0 [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5908]
* Version 3.0 — Public Discussion Launched [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/6017]
* Version 3.0 — Revised License Drafts [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/6120]
* Version 3.0 — It's Happening & With BY-SA Compatibility Language Too [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/7234]
* Version 3.0 — Launched [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/7249]
* [[Versioning to 3.0]] - Legal Leads versioning to 3.0. Includes checklist, working document, sui generis database rights document, and CS document

[[Category:Project]]

License Versions

2012-02-15T20:42:21Z

Nagelstudio: /* Definition of "NonCommercial" unchanged (same in all versions) */

This page identifies some of the improvements to the Creative Commons license suite from the publication of the first licenses in December, 2002, through the current version 3.0, and highlights important similarities among the major license versions released to date. For more information on using CC tools or works offered under Creative Commons licenses, consult the [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions Frequently Asked Questions page.] For a further historical perspective, you may also review defunct CC legal tools at the [http://creativecommons.org/retiredlicenses retired legal tools page].

==License blog posts==
The chart below presents the major license versions, their launch dates, and blog posts announcing public comment periods, the launch of a license suite, and changes to the new licenses. It does not reference the unfinished version 3.x ([http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3.01 3.01], [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3.5 3.5]) licenses, which are not in active discussion and are not expected to be published. Version 3.0 is the recommended and most recently-published Creative Commons license suite; the 3.x license discussions address further potential upgrades and changes that may (or may not) be considered when CC commences discussion on the next [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_4 version 4.0 license]. The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Legalcode_errata Legalcode Errata page], to which you should feel free to contribute, catalogs minor bugs in the licenses such as typographical errors.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! License version*
! Release date
! Call for public comment
! Launch announcement
! Explanation of changes from prior version
|-
| 1.0
| 2002 Dec 16
|
| [http://creativecommons.org/press-releases/entry/3476 Creative Commons Unveils Machine-Readable Copyright Licenses]
|
|-
| 2.0
| 2004 May 25
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3981 Versioning -- Public Review Begins]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 Announcing (and explaining) our new 2.0 licenses]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 Announcing (and explaining) our new 2.0 licenses]
|-
| 2.5
| 2005 June
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5447 Tweaking CC's Standard Attribution Language -- An Invitation to Comment]
|
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5457 Comments Period Drawing to a close for Draft License Version 2.5]
|-
| 3.0
| 2007 Feb 23
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/6017 Version 3.0 -- Public Discussion Launched]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/7249 Version 3.0 Launched]
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3 Creative Commons Version 3.0 Licenses -- A Brief Explanation]
|}

* Note that CC also released a version 2.1 suite for jurisdictions like Spain, Australia and Japan, whose localized ports of the 2.0 suite contained errors.

==International License Development Process==

Creative Commons develops, releases and updates its public copyright licenses (and other legal tools) via an open and inclusive process of engagement with Creative Commons’ global network of attorneys and affiliates, as well as varied communities and constituents, that includes the publication of drafts, formal comment periods and transparent decision-making. This process culminates in the publication of the preferred, most up-to-date set of CC licenses for use around the world. Creative Commons released its latest version of the licenses in February 2007. Those licenses are known as the 3.0 international (also called the 3.0 “unported” and formerly referred to under version 2.0 as the “generic”) license suite.

While each set of licenses produced by CC is drafted to conform with copyright law, many of the improvements to the version 3.0 license suite brought the licenses further into line with international copyright law. Once a suite of licenses is released, Creative Commons grants permission to legal experts around the world under formal agreement to adapt (or “port”) the licenses where necessary to more fully align the text with the laws of different legal jurisdictions and translate the licenses to the local language(s). See our [http://creativecommons.org/international international] page for more information or access the [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database jurisdiction database] to compare the international (unported) licenses and the ported licenses of various jurisdictions.

In each instance, the resulting ported licenses are intended to have the same legal meaning and effect as the international (unported) licenses and the ported licenses of other jurisdictions at the same license version. Porting follows the same open and inclusive processes used to produce the international licenses: publication of drafts, comment periods, engagement with communities and constituents who use the licenses, and transparent decision-making processes. It also involves close oversight and review by CC staff.

==License Suite Versions==

The chart below and linked explanations that follow detail some of the improvements and important similarities among Creative Commons license versions. Some of the explanations contain links to further information on the topic.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! License Suite Version
! 1.0
! 2.0
! 2.5
! 3.0
|-
|'''All international (unported/generic) and ported licenses'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Nomenclature_.28for_unported_licenses.29 Nomenclature (for unported licenses)]
| Generic license
| Generic license
| Generic license
| International (unported) license
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Technical_Measures_by_Licensees_Prohibited Technological measures by users of CC licensed works prohibited]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Attribution_required Attribution required]
| Not all licenses
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Credit_to_others_contemplated Credit to others contemplated]
| No
| No
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Requests_for_removal_of_attribution_contemplated Requests for removal of attribution contemplated]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Collecting_societies_regimes_addressed Collecting societies regimes addressed]
| No
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Representations_and_warranties_by_licensor_included Representations and warranties by licensor included]
| Yes
| No
| No
| No
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#.22No_endorsement.22_clause_included "No endorsement" clause included]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Moral_rights_clause_included Moral rights clause included]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Adaptations_.28if_allowed.29_must_be_marked_as_such Adaptations (if allowed) must be marked as such]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Definition_of_.22NonCommercial.22_unchanged_.28same_in_all_versions.29 Definition of "NonCommercial" (has remained unchanged in all versions)]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Use_of_licenses_for_copyrightable_compilations_of_data_anticipated Use of licenses for copyrightable compilations of data anticipated]
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (explicit)
|-
| '''International (unported/generic) ShareAlike licenses'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Compatible_licenses_may_be_used_for_adaptations_of_works_originally_offered_under_CC_ShareAlike_licenses Compatible licenses may be used for adaptations of works originally offered under CC ShareAlike licenses]
| No
| CC only
| CC only
| Yes
|-
| '''Licenses ported to jurisdictions with sui generis rights'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Sui_generis_rights_in_databases_are_waived_for_uses_that_do_not_implicate_copyright Sui generis rights in databases are waived for uses that do not implicate copyright]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|}

==Nomenclature (for unported licenses)==

Before the launch of the version 3.0 licenses, the international (unported) licenses were called the “generic” licenses. The generic licenses were drafted to conform with U.S. law and conventions. Starting with version 3.0, Creative Commons [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#Further_Internationalization drafted its core suite of licenses to conform to relevant international treaties and drafting conventions]. In this sense, the version 3.0 international (unported) license suite is jurisdiction-agnostic: it does not mention nor is it drafted against any particular jurisdiction's laws or statutes, but rather it is intended to function without adjustment in all jurisdictions around the world. You may [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database access the jurisdiction database] and compare the international (unported) license to the ported licenses of various jurisdictions.

==Technical Measures by Licensees Prohibited==

All CC license versions prohibit licensees (as opposed to licensors) from using effective technological measures such as “digital rights management” software to restrict the ability of those who receive a CC licensed work from a licensee to exercise rights granted under the license. To be clear, encryption or an access limitation is not necessarily a technical protection measure prohibited by the licenses. For example, content sent via email and encrypted with the recipient's public key does not restrict use of the work by the recipient. Likewise, limiting recipients to a set of users (e.g., with a username and password) does not restrict use of the work by the recipients. In the cases above, encryption or an access limitation does not violate the prohibition on technological measures because the recipient is not prevented from exercising all rights granted by the license (including rights of further redistribution).

[http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#Debian This treatment was re-evaluated during the public process leading to release of the version 3.0 license suite.] CC considered arguments in favor of such measures, coupled with an obligation of parallel distribution. However, those arguments were ultimately rejected.

==Attribution required==
The version 1.0 suite is unique because it contains some CC licenses that do not require attribution. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 All subsequent license suites make attribution a standard requirement] unless the licensor specifies otherwise. The required mode of attribution differs slightly among the versions, and is progressively more flexible with each subsequent version.

==Credit to others contemplated==

Prior to the version 2.5 suite, CC licenses contemplated crediting the author only. Versions 2.5 and 3.0 [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5447 allow licensors to identify another party or organization for attribution], called the “Attribution Party.” This feature was introduced in part to alleviate burdensome or difficult attribution situations, such as may be the case when many people contribute to a wiki article or other multi-author, collaborative effort. In versions 2.5 and 3.0, licensors may designate another party for attribution purposes -- such as a sponsor institute, publishing entity or journal -- in addition to or instead of the author. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5457 You may review some of the concerns raised when CC proposed this change].

==Requests for removal of attribution contemplated==

All license versions after version 1.0 require attribution. However, legislation in many countries gives authors the right to control the use of their name in association with their works. Therefore, CC licenses require licensees to remove (otherwise required) attribution to the creator from collections or adaptations to the extent practicable at the creator’s request.

==Collecting societies regimes addressed==
Many users of Creative Commons licenses are also members of collective rights societies like ASCAP and BMI, which manage copyright on behalf of owners. Every version from the 2.0 suite onward contains clauses that account for the existence of those arrangements. They provide, for instance, that for works offered under a NonCommercial license, the licensor retains the right to collect royalties for commercial uses of the work. The [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 structure of the provisions in the 2.x licenses] (2.0, 2.1 and 2.5) differs from that in the version 3.0 licenses. The 2.x licenses specifically regulate music, sound recordings and webcasting. As those licenses were ported to different jurisdictions, those provisions were adjusted to conform to the local collecting society situation.
The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#International_Harmonization_.E2.80.94_Collecting_Societies version 3.0 licenses employ a broad, harmonized strategy to collective rights societies]. This strategy still allows jurisdictions to adopt an approach that best aligns with local law and society structure, but also ensures that the approach is implemented consistently across jurisdictions. In the international (unported) license, as regards compulsory royalty collection, the licensor reserves the right to collect those royalties in jurisdictions in which collection cannot be waived. In those jurisdictions in which compulsory royalty collection can be waived, the right to collect royalties is waived completely for those licenses that permit commercial use and reserved for commercial uses in those licenses that permit NonCommercial use only. For voluntary royalty schema, the licensor reserves the right to collect royalties for commercial uses in those licenses that permit NonCommercial use only, and completely waives the right to collect such royalties for licenses permitting commercial use. This clause covers both individual royalty collection and, in the event that the licensor is a member of a collecting society that collects such royalties, collection via such societies. Some affiliates porting the [http://www.nagelstudiohamburg.net version 3.0] licenses to interface with local collective rights regimes have chosen to include only those clauses which address the particular situation in the jurisdiction. Others have adopted all the language from the international (unported) license in hopes of international [http://www.nagelstudio-hamburg.net harmonization], or out of concern that their jurisdiction’s regime may change. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

==Representations and warranties by licensor included==

In the 1.0 license suite, the licensor extends warranties, for instance that the work does not infringe the work of another. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 These warranties were eliminated in all subsequent license versions.] All post-version 1.0 suites explicitly offer the work “AS IS” and disclaim all liabilities. Notwithstanding, some ports have included warranties where required under local law. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

=="No endorsement" clause included==

While attribution is required in all licenses post-version 1.0, a licensee may not provide credit in a way that suggests endorsement or sponsorship by the licensor. In some jurisdictions, wrongfully implying that an author, publisher or anyone else endorses a particular use of a work may be unlawful. While this has always been the case, [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#MIT the version 3.0 licenses for the first time explicitly prohibit endorsement or sponsorship without the consent of the licensor].

==Moral rights clause included==

While the existence and extent of moral rights differ by jurisdiction, the most consistently present rights are those of attribution and integrity (the right to prevent or halt the prejudicial use of one’s work by another). The 1.0 and 2.x generic licenses were drafted to conform to U.S. law, and because U.S. law recognizes moral rights in only very limited circumstances, the generic versions of those licenses suites do not address moral rights of authors.

Reflecting the global, harmonized approach of the version 3.0 license suite, [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#International_Harmonization_.E2.80.93_Moral_Rights CC addressed the issue clearly in the international (unported) licenses]. Since moral rights are not waivable in most jurisdictions, CC did not include a waiver of those rights in the international licenses. Instead, the licenses specifically instruct users that they “must not distort, mutilate, modify or take other derogatory action in relation to the Work which would be prejudicial to the Original Author's honor or reputation.” This mandate forbids licensees from making uses that would otherwise violate authors’ moral rights of integrity. The attribution requirement is intended to satisfy the right of attribution. In the porting process, some jurisdictions slightly adjust this provision with CC’s permission to specify that moral rights are waived to the extent necessary to effect the license to the degree a waiver is possible under applicable law. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

==Adaptations (if allowed) must be marked as such==

Beginning with the 3.0 license suite, licenses that permit the creation of adaptations require licensees to take reasonable steps to label the work as such. For instance, the adaptation could include a notice to the effect that, “The original work has been modified.”

==Definition of "NonCommercial" unchanged (same in all versions)==
While Creative Commons’ licenses have evolved over time, the scope of permitted uses under the NonCommercial (“NC”) licenses has remained unchanged across all license suites. The [http://nagelstudio.blogage.de NonCommercial] clause prohibits the exercise of rights granted under the NC license “in any manner that is primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation.” Creative Commons carried out a [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/17127 study on the NonCommerical clause and users’ understandings]. However, the exact meaning of the clause is still debated.

==Use of licenses for copyrightable compilations of data anticipated==
Creative Commons licenses may be used with all copyrightable works (note that CC does not recommend its licenses for use with computer software). Such works include compilations of data that exhibit the requisite level of creativity for copyright protection under applicable national law. Thus, to the extent compilations of data are protected by copyright, Creative Commons licenses are suitable licenses for exercising that right. For the avoidance of doubt, version 3.0 licenses explicitly include such compilations in the definition of “work.”

==Compatible licenses may be used for adaptations of works originally offered under CC ShareAlike licenses==

Users of works licensed under CC’s ShareAlike licenses must make adaptations and collections of those works available under the same terms and conditions. The version 1.0 licenses require that the adaptations be distributed under exactly the same license as was applied to the original work. Starting with the release of the [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 2.x license suites, CC expanded compatibility] by allowing adaptations to be licensed under the same or later version of the original license, including other ported versions of the same or later-version of the license. The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#BY-SA_.E2.80.94_Compatibility_Structure_Introduced 3.0 Attribution-ShareAlike goes one step further], by allowing adaptations of works licensed under its terms to be licensed under a “Creative Commons Compatible License,” defined to mean licenses approved by CC as essentially equivalent to the 3.0 Attribution-ShareAlike license. To date, CC has not approved any other licenses. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/8213 You may also review CC’s statement of intent for ShareAlike licenses].

==Sui generis rights in databases are waived for uses that do not implicate copyright==

A few early (2.0, 2.5) European jurisdiction CC license ports licensed database rights along with copyright.

Although the generic and international (unported) license suites do not mention sui generis rights, starting with the version 3.0 licenses, CC established a [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/images/f/f6/V3_Database_Rights.pdf policy for how those rights are addressed in ported licenses in those jurisdictions where sui generis rights exist.] The policy provides that version 3.0 EU jurisdiction ports must license sui generis rights subject to the terms and conditions of the license just like copyrights and neighboring rights, but also must waive license requirements and prohibitions (attribution, share-alike, etc) for uses triggering database rights — so that if the use of a database published under a CC license implicated only database rights, but not copyright, the CC license requirements and prohibitions would not apply to that use. The license requirements and prohibitions, however, continue to apply to all uses triggering copyright. Other ports and the unported license are silent on database rights: databases and data are licensed (i.e., subject to restrictions detailed in the license) to the extent copyrightable, and if data in the database or the database itself are not copyrightable the license restrictions do not apply to those parts (though they still apply to the remainder). Thus, regardless of the [http://www.nagelstudio-harburg.com CC 3.0] license at play (unported, an EU port, another port), uses which implicate only database rights will not trigger the license conditions, while uses which implicate copyright will.

In addition, the policy precludes exportation of the sui generis rights to jurisdictions where such rights are not recognized through inclusion of a territoriality limitation, thereby avoiding the imposition of restrictions based on sui generis rights via contract where those rights are not enforceable or recognized. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

License Versions

2012-02-15T20:39:13Z

Nagelstudio: /* Sui generis rights in databases are waived for uses that do not implicate copyright */

This page identifies some of the improvements to the Creative Commons license suite from the publication of the first licenses in December, 2002, through the current version 3.0, and highlights important similarities among the major license versions released to date. For more information on using CC tools or works offered under Creative Commons licenses, consult the [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions Frequently Asked Questions page.] For a further historical perspective, you may also review defunct CC legal tools at the [http://creativecommons.org/retiredlicenses retired legal tools page].

==License blog posts==
The chart below presents the major license versions, their launch dates, and blog posts announcing public comment periods, the launch of a license suite, and changes to the new licenses. It does not reference the unfinished version 3.x ([http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3.01 3.01], [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3.5 3.5]) licenses, which are not in active discussion and are not expected to be published. Version 3.0 is the recommended and most recently-published Creative Commons license suite; the 3.x license discussions address further potential upgrades and changes that may (or may not) be considered when CC commences discussion on the next [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_4 version 4.0 license]. The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Legalcode_errata Legalcode Errata page], to which you should feel free to contribute, catalogs minor bugs in the licenses such as typographical errors.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! License version*
! Release date
! Call for public comment
! Launch announcement
! Explanation of changes from prior version
|-
| 1.0
| 2002 Dec 16
|
| [http://creativecommons.org/press-releases/entry/3476 Creative Commons Unveils Machine-Readable Copyright Licenses]
|
|-
| 2.0
| 2004 May 25
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3981 Versioning -- Public Review Begins]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 Announcing (and explaining) our new 2.0 licenses]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 Announcing (and explaining) our new 2.0 licenses]
|-
| 2.5
| 2005 June
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5447 Tweaking CC's Standard Attribution Language -- An Invitation to Comment]
|
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5457 Comments Period Drawing to a close for Draft License Version 2.5]
|-
| 3.0
| 2007 Feb 23
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/6017 Version 3.0 -- Public Discussion Launched]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/7249 Version 3.0 Launched]
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3 Creative Commons Version 3.0 Licenses -- A Brief Explanation]
|}

* Note that CC also released a version 2.1 suite for jurisdictions like Spain, Australia and Japan, whose localized ports of the 2.0 suite contained errors.

==International License Development Process==

Creative Commons develops, releases and updates its public copyright licenses (and other legal tools) via an open and inclusive process of engagement with Creative Commons’ global network of attorneys and affiliates, as well as varied communities and constituents, that includes the publication of drafts, formal comment periods and transparent decision-making. This process culminates in the publication of the preferred, most up-to-date set of CC licenses for use around the world. Creative Commons released its latest version of the licenses in February 2007. Those licenses are known as the 3.0 international (also called the 3.0 “unported” and formerly referred to under version 2.0 as the “generic”) license suite.

While each set of licenses produced by CC is drafted to conform with copyright law, many of the improvements to the version 3.0 license suite brought the licenses further into line with international copyright law. Once a suite of licenses is released, Creative Commons grants permission to legal experts around the world under formal agreement to adapt (or “port”) the licenses where necessary to more fully align the text with the laws of different legal jurisdictions and translate the licenses to the local language(s). See our [http://creativecommons.org/international international] page for more information or access the [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database jurisdiction database] to compare the international (unported) licenses and the ported licenses of various jurisdictions.

In each instance, the resulting ported licenses are intended to have the same legal meaning and effect as the international (unported) licenses and the ported licenses of other jurisdictions at the same license version. Porting follows the same open and inclusive processes used to produce the international licenses: publication of drafts, comment periods, engagement with communities and constituents who use the licenses, and transparent decision-making processes. It also involves close oversight and review by CC staff.

==License Suite Versions==

The chart below and linked explanations that follow detail some of the improvements and important similarities among Creative Commons license versions. Some of the explanations contain links to further information on the topic.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! License Suite Version
! 1.0
! 2.0
! 2.5
! 3.0
|-
|'''All international (unported/generic) and ported licenses'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Nomenclature_.28for_unported_licenses.29 Nomenclature (for unported licenses)]
| Generic license
| Generic license
| Generic license
| International (unported) license
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Technical_Measures_by_Licensees_Prohibited Technological measures by users of CC licensed works prohibited]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Attribution_required Attribution required]
| Not all licenses
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Credit_to_others_contemplated Credit to others contemplated]
| No
| No
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Requests_for_removal_of_attribution_contemplated Requests for removal of attribution contemplated]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Collecting_societies_regimes_addressed Collecting societies regimes addressed]
| No
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Representations_and_warranties_by_licensor_included Representations and warranties by licensor included]
| Yes
| No
| No
| No
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#.22No_endorsement.22_clause_included "No endorsement" clause included]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Moral_rights_clause_included Moral rights clause included]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Adaptations_.28if_allowed.29_must_be_marked_as_such Adaptations (if allowed) must be marked as such]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Definition_of_.22NonCommercial.22_unchanged_.28same_in_all_versions.29 Definition of "NonCommercial" (has remained unchanged in all versions)]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Use_of_licenses_for_copyrightable_compilations_of_data_anticipated Use of licenses for copyrightable compilations of data anticipated]
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (explicit)
|-
| '''International (unported/generic) ShareAlike licenses'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Compatible_licenses_may_be_used_for_adaptations_of_works_originally_offered_under_CC_ShareAlike_licenses Compatible licenses may be used for adaptations of works originally offered under CC ShareAlike licenses]
| No
| CC only
| CC only
| Yes
|-
| '''Licenses ported to jurisdictions with sui generis rights'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Sui_generis_rights_in_databases_are_waived_for_uses_that_do_not_implicate_copyright Sui generis rights in databases are waived for uses that do not implicate copyright]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|}

==Nomenclature (for unported licenses)==

Before the launch of the version 3.0 licenses, the international (unported) licenses were called the “generic” licenses. The generic licenses were drafted to conform with U.S. law and conventions. Starting with version 3.0, Creative Commons [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#Further_Internationalization drafted its core suite of licenses to conform to relevant international treaties and drafting conventions]. In this sense, the version 3.0 international (unported) license suite is jurisdiction-agnostic: it does not mention nor is it drafted against any particular jurisdiction's laws or statutes, but rather it is intended to function without adjustment in all jurisdictions around the world. You may [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database access the jurisdiction database] and compare the international (unported) license to the ported licenses of various jurisdictions.

==Technical Measures by Licensees Prohibited==

All CC license versions prohibit licensees (as opposed to licensors) from using effective technological measures such as “digital rights management” software to restrict the ability of those who receive a CC licensed work from a licensee to exercise rights granted under the license. To be clear, encryption or an access limitation is not necessarily a technical protection measure prohibited by the licenses. For example, content sent via email and encrypted with the recipient's public key does not restrict use of the work by the recipient. Likewise, limiting recipients to a set of users (e.g., with a username and password) does not restrict use of the work by the recipients. In the cases above, encryption or an access limitation does not violate the prohibition on technological measures because the recipient is not prevented from exercising all rights granted by the license (including rights of further redistribution).

[http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#Debian This treatment was re-evaluated during the public process leading to release of the version 3.0 license suite.] CC considered arguments in favor of such measures, coupled with an obligation of parallel distribution. However, those arguments were ultimately rejected.

==Attribution required==
The version 1.0 suite is unique because it contains some CC licenses that do not require attribution. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 All subsequent license suites make attribution a standard requirement] unless the licensor specifies otherwise. The required mode of attribution differs slightly among the versions, and is progressively more flexible with each subsequent version.

==Credit to others contemplated==

Prior to the version 2.5 suite, CC licenses contemplated crediting the author only. Versions 2.5 and 3.0 [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5447 allow licensors to identify another party or organization for attribution], called the “Attribution Party.” This feature was introduced in part to alleviate burdensome or difficult attribution situations, such as may be the case when many people contribute to a wiki article or other multi-author, collaborative effort. In versions 2.5 and 3.0, licensors may designate another party for attribution purposes -- such as a sponsor institute, publishing entity or journal -- in addition to or instead of the author. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5457 You may review some of the concerns raised when CC proposed this change].

==Requests for removal of attribution contemplated==

All license versions after version 1.0 require attribution. However, legislation in many countries gives authors the right to control the use of their name in association with their works. Therefore, CC licenses require licensees to remove (otherwise required) attribution to the creator from collections or adaptations to the extent practicable at the creator’s request.

==Collecting societies regimes addressed==
Many users of Creative Commons licenses are also members of collective rights societies like ASCAP and BMI, which manage copyright on behalf of owners. Every version from the 2.0 suite onward contains clauses that account for the existence of those arrangements. They provide, for instance, that for works offered under a NonCommercial license, the licensor retains the right to collect royalties for commercial uses of the work. The [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 structure of the provisions in the 2.x licenses] (2.0, 2.1 and 2.5) differs from that in the version 3.0 licenses. The 2.x licenses specifically regulate music, sound recordings and webcasting. As those licenses were ported to different jurisdictions, those provisions were adjusted to conform to the local collecting society situation.
The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#International_Harmonization_.E2.80.94_Collecting_Societies version 3.0 licenses employ a broad, harmonized strategy to collective rights societies]. This strategy still allows jurisdictions to adopt an approach that best aligns with local law and society structure, but also ensures that the approach is implemented consistently across jurisdictions. In the international (unported) license, as regards compulsory royalty collection, the licensor reserves the right to collect those royalties in jurisdictions in which collection cannot be waived. In those jurisdictions in which compulsory royalty collection can be waived, the right to collect royalties is waived completely for those licenses that permit commercial use and reserved for commercial uses in those licenses that permit NonCommercial use only. For voluntary royalty schema, the licensor reserves the right to collect royalties for commercial uses in those licenses that permit NonCommercial use only, and completely waives the right to collect such royalties for licenses permitting commercial use. This clause covers both individual royalty collection and, in the event that the licensor is a member of a collecting society that collects such royalties, collection via such societies. Some affiliates porting the [http://www.nagelstudiohamburg.net version 3.0] licenses to interface with local collective rights regimes have chosen to include only those clauses which address the particular situation in the jurisdiction. Others have adopted all the language from the international (unported) license in hopes of international [http://www.nagelstudio-hamburg.net harmonization], or out of concern that their jurisdiction’s regime may change. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

==Representations and warranties by licensor included==

In the 1.0 license suite, the licensor extends warranties, for instance that the work does not infringe the work of another. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 These warranties were eliminated in all subsequent license versions.] All post-version 1.0 suites explicitly offer the work “AS IS” and disclaim all liabilities. Notwithstanding, some ports have included warranties where required under local law. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

=="No endorsement" clause included==

While attribution is required in all licenses post-version 1.0, a licensee may not provide credit in a way that suggests endorsement or sponsorship by the licensor. In some jurisdictions, wrongfully implying that an author, publisher or anyone else endorses a particular use of a work may be unlawful. While this has always been the case, [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#MIT the version 3.0 licenses for the first time explicitly prohibit endorsement or sponsorship without the consent of the licensor].

==Moral rights clause included==

While the existence and extent of moral rights differ by jurisdiction, the most consistently present rights are those of attribution and integrity (the right to prevent or halt the prejudicial use of one’s work by another). The 1.0 and 2.x generic licenses were drafted to conform to U.S. law, and because U.S. law recognizes moral rights in only very limited circumstances, the generic versions of those licenses suites do not address moral rights of authors.

Reflecting the global, harmonized approach of the version 3.0 license suite, [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#International_Harmonization_.E2.80.93_Moral_Rights CC addressed the issue clearly in the international (unported) licenses]. Since moral rights are not waivable in most jurisdictions, CC did not include a waiver of those rights in the international licenses. Instead, the licenses specifically instruct users that they “must not distort, mutilate, modify or take other derogatory action in relation to the Work which would be prejudicial to the Original Author's honor or reputation.” This mandate forbids licensees from making uses that would otherwise violate authors’ moral rights of integrity. The attribution requirement is intended to satisfy the right of attribution. In the porting process, some jurisdictions slightly adjust this provision with CC’s permission to specify that moral rights are waived to the extent necessary to effect the license to the degree a waiver is possible under applicable law. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

==Adaptations (if allowed) must be marked as such==

Beginning with the 3.0 license suite, licenses that permit the creation of adaptations require licensees to take reasonable steps to label the work as such. For instance, the adaptation could include a notice to the effect that, “The original work has been modified.”

==Definition of "NonCommercial" unchanged (same in all versions)==
While Creative Commons’ licenses have evolved over time, the scope of permitted uses under the NonCommercial (“NC”) licenses has remained unchanged across all license suites. The NonCommercial clause prohibits the exercise of rights granted under the NC license “in any manner that is primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation.” Creative Commons carried out a [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/17127 study on the NonCommerical clause and users’ understandings]. However, the exact meaning of the clause is still debated.

==Use of licenses for copyrightable compilations of data anticipated==
Creative Commons licenses may be used with all copyrightable works (note that CC does not recommend its licenses for use with computer software). Such works include compilations of data that exhibit the requisite level of creativity for copyright protection under applicable national law. Thus, to the extent compilations of data are protected by copyright, Creative Commons licenses are suitable licenses for exercising that right. For the avoidance of doubt, version 3.0 licenses explicitly include such compilations in the definition of “work.”

==Compatible licenses may be used for adaptations of works originally offered under CC ShareAlike licenses==

Users of works licensed under CC’s ShareAlike licenses must make adaptations and collections of those works available under the same terms and conditions. The version 1.0 licenses require that the adaptations be distributed under exactly the same license as was applied to the original work. Starting with the release of the [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 2.x license suites, CC expanded compatibility] by allowing adaptations to be licensed under the same or later version of the original license, including other ported versions of the same or later-version of the license. The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#BY-SA_.E2.80.94_Compatibility_Structure_Introduced 3.0 Attribution-ShareAlike goes one step further], by allowing adaptations of works licensed under its terms to be licensed under a “Creative Commons Compatible License,” defined to mean licenses approved by CC as essentially equivalent to the 3.0 Attribution-ShareAlike license. To date, CC has not approved any other licenses. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/8213 You may also review CC’s statement of intent for ShareAlike licenses].

==Sui generis rights in databases are waived for uses that do not implicate copyright==

A few early (2.0, 2.5) European jurisdiction CC license ports licensed database rights along with copyright.

Although the generic and international (unported) license suites do not mention sui generis rights, starting with the version 3.0 licenses, CC established a [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/images/f/f6/V3_Database_Rights.pdf policy for how those rights are addressed in ported licenses in those jurisdictions where sui generis rights exist.] The policy provides that version 3.0 EU jurisdiction ports must license sui generis rights subject to the terms and conditions of the license just like copyrights and neighboring rights, but also must waive license requirements and prohibitions (attribution, share-alike, etc) for uses triggering database rights — so that if the use of a database published under a CC license implicated only database rights, but not copyright, the CC license requirements and prohibitions would not apply to that use. The license requirements and prohibitions, however, continue to apply to all uses triggering copyright. Other ports and the unported license are silent on database rights: databases and data are licensed (i.e., subject to restrictions detailed in the license) to the extent copyrightable, and if data in the database or the database itself are not copyrightable the license restrictions do not apply to those parts (though they still apply to the remainder). Thus, regardless of the [http://www.nagelstudio-harburg.com CC 3.0] license at play (unported, an EU port, another port), uses which implicate only database rights will not trigger the license conditions, while uses which implicate copyright will.

In addition, the policy precludes exportation of the sui generis rights to jurisdictions where such rights are not recognized through inclusion of a territoriality limitation, thereby avoiding the imposition of restrictions based on sui generis rights via contract where those rights are not enforceable or recognized. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

License Versions

2012-02-15T20:38:06Z

Nagelstudio: /* Collecting societies regimes addressed */

This page identifies some of the improvements to the Creative Commons license suite from the publication of the first licenses in December, 2002, through the current version 3.0, and highlights important similarities among the major license versions released to date. For more information on using CC tools or works offered under Creative Commons licenses, consult the [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions Frequently Asked Questions page.] For a further historical perspective, you may also review defunct CC legal tools at the [http://creativecommons.org/retiredlicenses retired legal tools page].

==License blog posts==
The chart below presents the major license versions, their launch dates, and blog posts announcing public comment periods, the launch of a license suite, and changes to the new licenses. It does not reference the unfinished version 3.x ([http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3.01 3.01], [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3.5 3.5]) licenses, which are not in active discussion and are not expected to be published. Version 3.0 is the recommended and most recently-published Creative Commons license suite; the 3.x license discussions address further potential upgrades and changes that may (or may not) be considered when CC commences discussion on the next [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_4 version 4.0 license]. The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Legalcode_errata Legalcode Errata page], to which you should feel free to contribute, catalogs minor bugs in the licenses such as typographical errors.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! License version*
! Release date
! Call for public comment
! Launch announcement
! Explanation of changes from prior version
|-
| 1.0
| 2002 Dec 16
|
| [http://creativecommons.org/press-releases/entry/3476 Creative Commons Unveils Machine-Readable Copyright Licenses]
|
|-
| 2.0
| 2004 May 25
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3981 Versioning -- Public Review Begins]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 Announcing (and explaining) our new 2.0 licenses]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 Announcing (and explaining) our new 2.0 licenses]
|-
| 2.5
| 2005 June
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5447 Tweaking CC's Standard Attribution Language -- An Invitation to Comment]
|
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5457 Comments Period Drawing to a close for Draft License Version 2.5]
|-
| 3.0
| 2007 Feb 23
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/6017 Version 3.0 -- Public Discussion Launched]
| [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/7249 Version 3.0 Launched]
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3 Creative Commons Version 3.0 Licenses -- A Brief Explanation]
|}

* Note that CC also released a version 2.1 suite for jurisdictions like Spain, Australia and Japan, whose localized ports of the 2.0 suite contained errors.

==International License Development Process==

Creative Commons develops, releases and updates its public copyright licenses (and other legal tools) via an open and inclusive process of engagement with Creative Commons’ global network of attorneys and affiliates, as well as varied communities and constituents, that includes the publication of drafts, formal comment periods and transparent decision-making. This process culminates in the publication of the preferred, most up-to-date set of CC licenses for use around the world. Creative Commons released its latest version of the licenses in February 2007. Those licenses are known as the 3.0 international (also called the 3.0 “unported” and formerly referred to under version 2.0 as the “generic”) license suite.

While each set of licenses produced by CC is drafted to conform with copyright law, many of the improvements to the version 3.0 license suite brought the licenses further into line with international copyright law. Once a suite of licenses is released, Creative Commons grants permission to legal experts around the world under formal agreement to adapt (or “port”) the licenses where necessary to more fully align the text with the laws of different legal jurisdictions and translate the licenses to the local language(s). See our [http://creativecommons.org/international international] page for more information or access the [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database jurisdiction database] to compare the international (unported) licenses and the ported licenses of various jurisdictions.

In each instance, the resulting ported licenses are intended to have the same legal meaning and effect as the international (unported) licenses and the ported licenses of other jurisdictions at the same license version. Porting follows the same open and inclusive processes used to produce the international licenses: publication of drafts, comment periods, engagement with communities and constituents who use the licenses, and transparent decision-making processes. It also involves close oversight and review by CC staff.

==License Suite Versions==

The chart below and linked explanations that follow detail some of the improvements and important similarities among Creative Commons license versions. Some of the explanations contain links to further information on the topic.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! License Suite Version
! 1.0
! 2.0
! 2.5
! 3.0
|-
|'''All international (unported/generic) and ported licenses'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Nomenclature_.28for_unported_licenses.29 Nomenclature (for unported licenses)]
| Generic license
| Generic license
| Generic license
| International (unported) license
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Technical_Measures_by_Licensees_Prohibited Technological measures by users of CC licensed works prohibited]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Attribution_required Attribution required]
| Not all licenses
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Credit_to_others_contemplated Credit to others contemplated]
| No
| No
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Requests_for_removal_of_attribution_contemplated Requests for removal of attribution contemplated]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Collecting_societies_regimes_addressed Collecting societies regimes addressed]
| No
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Representations_and_warranties_by_licensor_included Representations and warranties by licensor included]
| Yes
| No
| No
| No
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#.22No_endorsement.22_clause_included "No endorsement" clause included]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Moral_rights_clause_included Moral rights clause included]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Adaptations_.28if_allowed.29_must_be_marked_as_such Adaptations (if allowed) must be marked as such]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Definition_of_.22NonCommercial.22_unchanged_.28same_in_all_versions.29 Definition of "NonCommercial" (has remained unchanged in all versions)]
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Use_of_licenses_for_copyrightable_compilations_of_data_anticipated Use of licenses for copyrightable compilations of data anticipated]
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (implied)
| Yes (explicit)
|-
| '''International (unported/generic) ShareAlike licenses'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Compatible_licenses_may_be_used_for_adaptations_of_works_originally_offered_under_CC_ShareAlike_licenses Compatible licenses may be used for adaptations of works originally offered under CC ShareAlike licenses]
| No
| CC only
| CC only
| Yes
|-
| '''Licenses ported to jurisdictions with sui generis rights'''
|
|
|
|
|-
| [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_versions#Sui_generis_rights_in_databases_are_waived_for_uses_that_do_not_implicate_copyright Sui generis rights in databases are waived for uses that do not implicate copyright]
| No
| No
| No
| Yes
|}

==Nomenclature (for unported licenses)==

Before the launch of the version 3.0 licenses, the international (unported) licenses were called the “generic” licenses. The generic licenses were drafted to conform with U.S. law and conventions. Starting with version 3.0, Creative Commons [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#Further_Internationalization drafted its core suite of licenses to conform to relevant international treaties and drafting conventions]. In this sense, the version 3.0 international (unported) license suite is jurisdiction-agnostic: it does not mention nor is it drafted against any particular jurisdiction's laws or statutes, but rather it is intended to function without adjustment in all jurisdictions around the world. You may [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database access the jurisdiction database] and compare the international (unported) license to the ported licenses of various jurisdictions.

==Technical Measures by Licensees Prohibited==

All CC license versions prohibit licensees (as opposed to licensors) from using effective technological measures such as “digital rights management” software to restrict the ability of those who receive a CC licensed work from a licensee to exercise rights granted under the license. To be clear, encryption or an access limitation is not necessarily a technical protection measure prohibited by the licenses. For example, content sent via email and encrypted with the recipient's public key does not restrict use of the work by the recipient. Likewise, limiting recipients to a set of users (e.g., with a username and password) does not restrict use of the work by the recipients. In the cases above, encryption or an access limitation does not violate the prohibition on technological measures because the recipient is not prevented from exercising all rights granted by the license (including rights of further redistribution).

[http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#Debian This treatment was re-evaluated during the public process leading to release of the version 3.0 license suite.] CC considered arguments in favor of such measures, coupled with an obligation of parallel distribution. However, those arguments were ultimately rejected.

==Attribution required==
The version 1.0 suite is unique because it contains some CC licenses that do not require attribution. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 All subsequent license suites make attribution a standard requirement] unless the licensor specifies otherwise. The required mode of attribution differs slightly among the versions, and is progressively more flexible with each subsequent version.

==Credit to others contemplated==

Prior to the version 2.5 suite, CC licenses contemplated crediting the author only. Versions 2.5 and 3.0 [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5447 allow licensors to identify another party or organization for attribution], called the “Attribution Party.” This feature was introduced in part to alleviate burdensome or difficult attribution situations, such as may be the case when many people contribute to a wiki article or other multi-author, collaborative effort. In versions 2.5 and 3.0, licensors may designate another party for attribution purposes -- such as a sponsor institute, publishing entity or journal -- in addition to or instead of the author. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5457 You may review some of the concerns raised when CC proposed this change].

==Requests for removal of attribution contemplated==

All license versions after version 1.0 require attribution. However, legislation in many countries gives authors the right to control the use of their name in association with their works. Therefore, CC licenses require licensees to remove (otherwise required) attribution to the creator from collections or adaptations to the extent practicable at the creator’s request.

==Collecting societies regimes addressed==
Many users of Creative Commons licenses are also members of collective rights societies like ASCAP and BMI, which manage copyright on behalf of owners. Every version from the 2.0 suite onward contains clauses that account for the existence of those arrangements. They provide, for instance, that for works offered under a NonCommercial license, the licensor retains the right to collect royalties for commercial uses of the work. The [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 structure of the provisions in the 2.x licenses] (2.0, 2.1 and 2.5) differs from that in the version 3.0 licenses. The 2.x licenses specifically regulate music, sound recordings and webcasting. As those licenses were ported to different jurisdictions, those provisions were adjusted to conform to the local collecting society situation.
The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#International_Harmonization_.E2.80.94_Collecting_Societies version 3.0 licenses employ a broad, harmonized strategy to collective rights societies]. This strategy still allows jurisdictions to adopt an approach that best aligns with local law and society structure, but also ensures that the approach is implemented consistently across jurisdictions. In the international (unported) license, as regards compulsory royalty collection, the licensor reserves the right to collect those royalties in jurisdictions in which collection cannot be waived. In those jurisdictions in which compulsory royalty collection can be waived, the right to collect royalties is waived completely for those licenses that permit commercial use and reserved for commercial uses in those licenses that permit NonCommercial use only. For voluntary royalty schema, the licensor reserves the right to collect royalties for commercial uses in those licenses that permit NonCommercial use only, and completely waives the right to collect such royalties for licenses permitting commercial use. This clause covers both individual royalty collection and, in the event that the licensor is a member of a collecting society that collects such royalties, collection via such societies. Some affiliates porting the [http://www.nagelstudiohamburg.net version 3.0] licenses to interface with local collective rights regimes have chosen to include only those clauses which address the particular situation in the jurisdiction. Others have adopted all the language from the international (unported) license in hopes of international [http://www.nagelstudio-hamburg.net harmonization], or out of concern that their jurisdiction’s regime may change. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

==Representations and warranties by licensor included==

In the 1.0 license suite, the licensor extends warranties, for instance that the work does not infringe the work of another. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 These warranties were eliminated in all subsequent license versions.] All post-version 1.0 suites explicitly offer the work “AS IS” and disclaim all liabilities. Notwithstanding, some ports have included warranties where required under local law. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

=="No endorsement" clause included==

While attribution is required in all licenses post-version 1.0, a licensee may not provide credit in a way that suggests endorsement or sponsorship by the licensor. In some jurisdictions, wrongfully implying that an author, publisher or anyone else endorses a particular use of a work may be unlawful. While this has always been the case, [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#MIT the version 3.0 licenses for the first time explicitly prohibit endorsement or sponsorship without the consent of the licensor].

==Moral rights clause included==

While the existence and extent of moral rights differ by jurisdiction, the most consistently present rights are those of attribution and integrity (the right to prevent or halt the prejudicial use of one’s work by another). The 1.0 and 2.x generic licenses were drafted to conform to U.S. law, and because U.S. law recognizes moral rights in only very limited circumstances, the generic versions of those licenses suites do not address moral rights of authors.

Reflecting the global, harmonized approach of the version 3.0 license suite, [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#International_Harmonization_.E2.80.93_Moral_Rights CC addressed the issue clearly in the international (unported) licenses]. Since moral rights are not waivable in most jurisdictions, CC did not include a waiver of those rights in the international licenses. Instead, the licenses specifically instruct users that they “must not distort, mutilate, modify or take other derogatory action in relation to the Work which would be prejudicial to the Original Author's honor or reputation.” This mandate forbids licensees from making uses that would otherwise violate authors’ moral rights of integrity. The attribution requirement is intended to satisfy the right of attribution. In the porting process, some jurisdictions slightly adjust this provision with CC’s permission to specify that moral rights are waived to the extent necessary to effect the license to the degree a waiver is possible under applicable law. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

==Adaptations (if allowed) must be marked as such==

Beginning with the 3.0 license suite, licenses that permit the creation of adaptations require licensees to take reasonable steps to label the work as such. For instance, the adaptation could include a notice to the effect that, “The original work has been modified.”

==Definition of "NonCommercial" unchanged (same in all versions)==
While Creative Commons’ licenses have evolved over time, the scope of permitted uses under the NonCommercial (“NC”) licenses has remained unchanged across all license suites. The NonCommercial clause prohibits the exercise of rights granted under the NC license “in any manner that is primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation.” Creative Commons carried out a [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/17127 study on the NonCommerical clause and users’ understandings]. However, the exact meaning of the clause is still debated.

==Use of licenses for copyrightable compilations of data anticipated==
Creative Commons licenses may be used with all copyrightable works (note that CC does not recommend its licenses for use with computer software). Such works include compilations of data that exhibit the requisite level of creativity for copyright protection under applicable national law. Thus, to the extent compilations of data are protected by copyright, Creative Commons licenses are suitable licenses for exercising that right. For the avoidance of doubt, version 3.0 licenses explicitly include such compilations in the definition of “work.”

==Compatible licenses may be used for adaptations of works originally offered under CC ShareAlike licenses==

Users of works licensed under CC’s ShareAlike licenses must make adaptations and collections of those works available under the same terms and conditions. The version 1.0 licenses require that the adaptations be distributed under exactly the same license as was applied to the original work. Starting with the release of the [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4216 2.x license suites, CC expanded compatibility] by allowing adaptations to be licensed under the same or later version of the original license, including other ported versions of the same or later-version of the license. The [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Version_3#BY-SA_.E2.80.94_Compatibility_Structure_Introduced 3.0 Attribution-ShareAlike goes one step further], by allowing adaptations of works licensed under its terms to be licensed under a “Creative Commons Compatible License,” defined to mean licenses approved by CC as essentially equivalent to the 3.0 Attribution-ShareAlike license. To date, CC has not approved any other licenses. [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/8213 You may also review CC’s statement of intent for ShareAlike licenses].

==Sui generis rights in databases are waived for uses that do not implicate copyright==

A few early (2.0, 2.5) European jurisdiction CC license ports licensed database rights along with copyright.

Although the generic and international (unported) license suites do not mention sui generis rights, starting with the version 3.0 licenses, CC established a [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/images/f/f6/V3_Database_Rights.pdf policy for how those rights are addressed in ported licenses in those jurisdictions where sui generis rights exist.] The policy provides that version 3.0 EU jurisdiction ports must license sui generis rights subject to the terms and conditions of the license just like copyrights and neighboring rights, but also must waive license requirements and prohibitions (attribution, share-alike, etc) for uses triggering database rights — so that if the use of a database published under a CC license implicated only database rights, but not copyright, the CC license requirements and prohibitions would not apply to that use. The license requirements and prohibitions, however, continue to apply to all uses triggering copyright. Other ports and the unported license are silent on database rights: databases and data are licensed (i.e., subject to restrictions detailed in the license) to the extent copyrightable, and if data in the database or the database itself are not copyrightable the license restrictions do not apply to those parts (though they still apply to the remainder). Thus, regardless of the CC 3.0 license at play (unported, an EU port, another port), uses which implicate only database rights will not trigger the license conditions, while uses which implicate copyright will.

In addition, the policy precludes exportation of the sui generis rights to jurisdictions where such rights are not recognized through inclusion of a territoriality limitation, thereby avoiding the imposition of restrictions based on sui generis rights via contract where those rights are not enforceable or recognized. [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Jurisdiction_Database You may compare how different jurisdictions implemented this section of the license].

4.0

2012-02-15T20:36:01Z

Nagelstudio: /* Items for discussion */

CC is embarking on a versioning process for its core license suite, which we expect will result in version 4.0. The first public discussions of 4.0 were held at CC's [[Global Summit 2011]]. The public process was kicked off with a [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/29639?utm_campaign=newsletter_1111&utm_medium=blog&utm_source=newsletter blog post] laying out some of the key reasons for pursuing 4.0 at this time.

Since CC's launch in 2002, it has versioned its core license suite [[license versions|three times]], the last ([[Version 3|3.0]]) in early 2007. CC licenses constitute a [http://creativecommons.org/who-uses-cc globally-recognized framework], developed in consultation with legal experts and CC affiliate institutions in [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC_Affiliate_Network over 70 jurisdictions]. Over 500 million CC-licensed works have been published by their authors on the Internet. Today, Creative Commons licenses, public domain tools, and supporting technologies are the global standard for sharing across culture, education, government, science, and more.

Version 4.0 is a tremendous opportunity to ensure the license suite is ideally crafted to further CC's [http://creativecommons.org/about vision and mission] over the next decades. Please participate in this important discussion.

=== Goals and objectives ===

Creative Commons staff, board and community have to date identified several goals for the next version of its core license suite tied to achieving CC's goal and mission. These include:

:: ''Internationalization'' – further adapt the core suite of international licenses to operate globally, ensuring they are robust, enforceable and easily adopted worldwide;
:: ''Interoperability'' – maximize interoperability between [http://www.nagelstudiohamburg.net CC licenses] and other licenses to reduce friction within the commons, promote standards and stem license proliferation;

:: ''Long-lasting'' — anticipate new and changing adoption opportunities and legal challenges, allowing the new suite of licenses to endure for the foreseeable future;

:: ''Data/PSI/Science/Education'' — recognize and address impediments to adoption of CC by governments as well as other important, publicly-minded institutions in these and other critical arenas; and

:: ''Supporting Existing Adoption Models and Frameworks'' – remain mindful of and accommodate the needs of our existing community of adopters leveraging pre-4.0 licenses, including governments but also other important constituencies.

=== Organization and purpose of this wiki ===

This wiki is the central location for documenting key discussion topics and suggestions for improving the license suite in version 4.0, together with supporting information and relevant links. It is intended to supplement, not replace, the CC license discuss email list [http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses (subscribe)] that will serve as the main discussion forum for the versioning process just as it has with prior versioning efforts.

CC has pre-populated the wiki with key topics identified to date. We ask contributors to be thoughtful about placement of additional and related topics, and the creation of new pages altogether. Before starting a new page, consider posting the suggestion to the [[4.0/Sandbox|Sandbox]]. We would also prefer (but do not require) that contributors use their real names when editing the wiki.

=== Process ===

As a license steward and steward of the commons, our goal for the process is to ensure utmost transparency and inclusiveness. The 4.0 process will be conducted in line with our prior versioning efforts, with periodic publication of license drafts for public comment and documentation of issue resolution as that occurs. One important difference from our past efforts, however, is a formal requirements gathering period that will run for a period of time prior to publication of the first draft. During this period, we strongly encourage the broadest participation possible by everyone with an interest in the commons and the role open licensing plays in its future.

The primary discussion forum for issues relating to the 4.0 versioning process will be the CC license discuss email list. Please [http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses subscribe] and add your voice to this important effort.

=== Draft timeline ===
The dates noted below are approximate and subject to change. The number of drafts and public comment periods may vary depending on the number and type of issues raised and how they are resolved, among other things. Watch this page for updates, including major events such as affiliate regional meetings where 4.0 discussions will take place.

{| class="wikitable" style="width: 75%; height: 200px" border="1"
|-
| September 2011
| [https://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/29639 Launch 4.0 process] at CC Global Summit
|-
| December 2011 thru mid-February 2012
| Requirements gathering period
|-
| February/March 2012
| Publish first draft of 4.0 (link to draft to be included here)
|-
|March thru April 2012
| Public comment period #1
|-
| May 2012
| Publish second draft of 4.0 (link to draft to be included here)
|-
| May to July 2012
| Public comment period #2
|-
| August 2012
| Publish third (and potentially last) draft of 4.0 (link to draft to be included here); begin porting consultation
|-
| August thru September 2012
| Third (and potentially last) public comment period; porting consultation
|-
| September to December 2012
| Finalize and publish version 4.0 license suite
|}

=== Items for discussion ===
Various aspects of the license suite ''potentially'' could be improved in the version 4.0 licenses. We will gather and rigorously debate and analyze these items and corresponding proposals for handling them in [http://www.nagelstudio-hamburg.net version 4.0]. We encourage the broadest possible engagement in this process. This is a particularly important goal during the requirements gathering stage when everyone is strongly encouraged (and our affiliates are expected) to provide feedback on proposed changes and suggest other changes they would like to see. Add, improve, and discuss specific items in the pages linked below.

'''If you do not find a suitable existing page and category for an item you would like to propose or discuss, please add it to the [[4.0/Sandbox]] where suggestions for new pages will be aggregated.'''

Finally, we encourage contributors to take the time to review [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_Versions prior versioning efforts], including relevant discussions of important topics previously debated by the CC community and discussions related to their resolution. Being aware of and taking those into account will be important to an effective and efficient process, particularly if a request is made to revisit and potentially change [http://www.nagelstudio-harburg.com direction] in 4.0.

{{#ask:[[Category:4.0 Issues]] [[:+]]
|mainlabel=Item/Category Name
|format=broadtable
}}
Related pages
:[[4.0/Sandbox]]
:[[Porting Project]]

4.0

2012-02-15T20:30:12Z

Nagelstudio: /* Items for discussion */

CC is embarking on a versioning process for its core license suite, which we expect will result in version 4.0. The first public discussions of 4.0 were held at CC's [[Global Summit 2011]]. The public process was kicked off with a [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/29639?utm_campaign=newsletter_1111&utm_medium=blog&utm_source=newsletter blog post] laying out some of the key reasons for pursuing 4.0 at this time.

Since CC's launch in 2002, it has versioned its core license suite [[license versions|three times]], the last ([[Version 3|3.0]]) in early 2007. CC licenses constitute a [http://creativecommons.org/who-uses-cc globally-recognized framework], developed in consultation with legal experts and CC affiliate institutions in [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC_Affiliate_Network over 70 jurisdictions]. Over 500 million CC-licensed works have been published by their authors on the Internet. Today, Creative Commons licenses, public domain tools, and supporting technologies are the global standard for sharing across culture, education, government, science, and more.

Version 4.0 is a tremendous opportunity to ensure the license suite is ideally crafted to further CC's [http://creativecommons.org/about vision and mission] over the next decades. Please participate in this important discussion.

=== Goals and objectives ===

Creative Commons staff, board and community have to date identified several goals for the next version of its core license suite tied to achieving CC's goal and mission. These include:

:: ''Internationalization'' – further adapt the core suite of international licenses to operate globally, ensuring they are robust, enforceable and easily adopted worldwide;
:: ''Interoperability'' – maximize interoperability between [http://www.nagelstudiohamburg.net CC licenses] and other licenses to reduce friction within the commons, promote standards and stem license proliferation;

:: ''Long-lasting'' — anticipate new and changing adoption opportunities and legal challenges, allowing the new suite of licenses to endure for the foreseeable future;

:: ''Data/PSI/Science/Education'' — recognize and address impediments to adoption of CC by governments as well as other important, publicly-minded institutions in these and other critical arenas; and

:: ''Supporting Existing Adoption Models and Frameworks'' – remain mindful of and accommodate the needs of our existing community of adopters leveraging pre-4.0 licenses, including governments but also other important constituencies.

=== Organization and purpose of this wiki ===

This wiki is the central location for documenting key discussion topics and suggestions for improving the license suite in version 4.0, together with supporting information and relevant links. It is intended to supplement, not replace, the CC license discuss email list [http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses (subscribe)] that will serve as the main discussion forum for the versioning process just as it has with prior versioning efforts.

CC has pre-populated the wiki with key topics identified to date. We ask contributors to be thoughtful about placement of additional and related topics, and the creation of new pages altogether. Before starting a new page, consider posting the suggestion to the [[4.0/Sandbox|Sandbox]]. We would also prefer (but do not require) that contributors use their real names when editing the wiki.

=== Process ===

As a license steward and steward of the commons, our goal for the process is to ensure utmost transparency and inclusiveness. The 4.0 process will be conducted in line with our prior versioning efforts, with periodic publication of license drafts for public comment and documentation of issue resolution as that occurs. One important difference from our past efforts, however, is a formal requirements gathering period that will run for a period of time prior to publication of the first draft. During this period, we strongly encourage the broadest participation possible by everyone with an interest in the commons and the role open licensing plays in its future.

The primary discussion forum for issues relating to the 4.0 versioning process will be the CC license discuss email list. Please [http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses subscribe] and add your voice to this important effort.

=== Draft timeline ===
The dates noted below are approximate and subject to change. The number of drafts and public comment periods may vary depending on the number and type of issues raised and how they are resolved, among other things. Watch this page for updates, including major events such as affiliate regional meetings where 4.0 discussions will take place.

{| class="wikitable" style="width: 75%; height: 200px" border="1"
|-
| September 2011
| [https://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/29639 Launch 4.0 process] at CC Global Summit
|-
| December 2011 thru mid-February 2012
| Requirements gathering period
|-
| February/March 2012
| Publish first draft of 4.0 (link to draft to be included here)
|-
|March thru April 2012
| Public comment period #1
|-
| May 2012
| Publish second draft of 4.0 (link to draft to be included here)
|-
| May to July 2012
| Public comment period #2
|-
| August 2012
| Publish third (and potentially last) draft of 4.0 (link to draft to be included here); begin porting consultation
|-
| August thru September 2012
| Third (and potentially last) public comment period; porting consultation
|-
| September to December 2012
| Finalize and publish version 4.0 license suite
|}

=== Items for discussion ===
Various aspects of the license suite ''potentially'' could be improved in the version 4.0 licenses. We will gather and rigorously debate and analyze these items and corresponding proposals for handling them in [http://www.nagelstudio-hamburg.net version 4.0]. We encourage the broadest possible engagement in this process. This is a particularly important goal during the requirements gathering stage when everyone is strongly encouraged (and our affiliates are expected) to provide feedback on proposed changes and suggest other changes they would like to see. Add, improve, and discuss specific items in the pages linked below.

'''If you do not find a suitable existing page and category for an item you would like to propose or discuss, please add it to the [[4.0/Sandbox]] where suggestions for new pages will be aggregated.'''

Finally, we encourage contributors to take the time to review [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_Versions prior versioning efforts], including relevant discussions of important topics previously debated by the CC community and discussions related to their resolution. Being aware of and taking those into account will be important to an effective and efficient process, particularly if a request is made to revisit and potentially change direction in 4.0.

{{#ask:[[Category:4.0 Issues]] [[:+]]
|mainlabel=Item/Category Name
|format=broadtable
}}
Related pages
:[[4.0/Sandbox]]
:[[Porting Project]]

4.0

2012-02-15T20:28:12Z

Nagelstudio: /* Goals and objectives */

CC is embarking on a versioning process for its core license suite, which we expect will result in version 4.0. The first public discussions of 4.0 were held at CC's [[Global Summit 2011]]. The public process was kicked off with a [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/29639?utm_campaign=newsletter_1111&utm_medium=blog&utm_source=newsletter blog post] laying out some of the key reasons for pursuing 4.0 at this time.

Since CC's launch in 2002, it has versioned its core license suite [[license versions|three times]], the last ([[Version 3|3.0]]) in early 2007. CC licenses constitute a [http://creativecommons.org/who-uses-cc globally-recognized framework], developed in consultation with legal experts and CC affiliate institutions in [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC_Affiliate_Network over 70 jurisdictions]. Over 500 million CC-licensed works have been published by their authors on the Internet. Today, Creative Commons licenses, public domain tools, and supporting technologies are the global standard for sharing across culture, education, government, science, and more.

Version 4.0 is a tremendous opportunity to ensure the license suite is ideally crafted to further CC's [http://creativecommons.org/about vision and mission] over the next decades. Please participate in this important discussion.

=== Goals and objectives ===

Creative Commons staff, board and community have to date identified several goals for the next version of its core license suite tied to achieving CC's goal and mission. These include:

:: ''Internationalization'' – further adapt the core suite of international licenses to operate globally, ensuring they are robust, enforceable and easily adopted worldwide;
:: ''Interoperability'' – maximize interoperability between [http://www.nagelstudiohamburg.net CC licenses] and other licenses to reduce friction within the commons, promote standards and stem license proliferation;

:: ''Long-lasting'' — anticipate new and changing adoption opportunities and legal challenges, allowing the new suite of licenses to endure for the foreseeable future;

:: ''Data/PSI/Science/Education'' — recognize and address impediments to adoption of CC by governments as well as other important, publicly-minded institutions in these and other critical arenas; and

:: ''Supporting Existing Adoption Models and Frameworks'' – remain mindful of and accommodate the needs of our existing community of adopters leveraging pre-4.0 licenses, including governments but also other important constituencies.

=== Organization and purpose of this wiki ===

This wiki is the central location for documenting key discussion topics and suggestions for improving the license suite in version 4.0, together with supporting information and relevant links. It is intended to supplement, not replace, the CC license discuss email list [http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses (subscribe)] that will serve as the main discussion forum for the versioning process just as it has with prior versioning efforts.

CC has pre-populated the wiki with key topics identified to date. We ask contributors to be thoughtful about placement of additional and related topics, and the creation of new pages altogether. Before starting a new page, consider posting the suggestion to the [[4.0/Sandbox|Sandbox]]. We would also prefer (but do not require) that contributors use their real names when editing the wiki.

=== Process ===

As a license steward and steward of the commons, our goal for the process is to ensure utmost transparency and inclusiveness. The 4.0 process will be conducted in line with our prior versioning efforts, with periodic publication of license drafts for public comment and documentation of issue resolution as that occurs. One important difference from our past efforts, however, is a formal requirements gathering period that will run for a period of time prior to publication of the first draft. During this period, we strongly encourage the broadest participation possible by everyone with an interest in the commons and the role open licensing plays in its future.

The primary discussion forum for issues relating to the 4.0 versioning process will be the CC license discuss email list. Please [http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses subscribe] and add your voice to this important effort.

=== Draft timeline ===
The dates noted below are approximate and subject to change. The number of drafts and public comment periods may vary depending on the number and type of issues raised and how they are resolved, among other things. Watch this page for updates, including major events such as affiliate regional meetings where 4.0 discussions will take place.

{| class="wikitable" style="width: 75%; height: 200px" border="1"
|-
| September 2011
| [https://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/29639 Launch 4.0 process] at CC Global Summit
|-
| December 2011 thru mid-February 2012
| Requirements gathering period
|-
| February/March 2012
| Publish first draft of 4.0 (link to draft to be included here)
|-
|March thru April 2012
| Public comment period #1
|-
| May 2012
| Publish second draft of 4.0 (link to draft to be included here)
|-
| May to July 2012
| Public comment period #2
|-
| August 2012
| Publish third (and potentially last) draft of 4.0 (link to draft to be included here); begin porting consultation
|-
| August thru September 2012
| Third (and potentially last) public comment period; porting consultation
|-
| September to December 2012
| Finalize and publish version 4.0 license suite
|}

=== Items for discussion ===

Various aspects of the license suite ''potentially'' could be improved in the version 4.0 licenses. We will gather and rigorously debate and analyze these items and corresponding proposals for handling them in version 4.0. We encourage the broadest possible engagement in this process. This is a particularly important goal during the requirements gathering stage when everyone is strongly encouraged (and our affiliates are expected) to provide feedback on proposed changes and suggest other changes they would like to see. Add, improve, and discuss specific items in the pages linked below.

'''If you do not find a suitable existing page and category for an item you would like to propose or discuss, please add it to the [[4.0/Sandbox]] where suggestions for new pages will be aggregated.'''

Finally, we encourage contributors to take the time to review [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_Versions prior versioning efforts], including relevant discussions of important topics previously debated by the CC community and discussions related to their resolution. Being aware of and taking those into account will be important to an effective and efficient process, particularly if a request is made to revisit and potentially change direction in 4.0.

{{#ask:[[Category:4.0 Issues]] [[:+]]
|mainlabel=Item/Category Name
|format=broadtable
}}
Related pages
:[[4.0/Sandbox]]
:[[Porting Project]]

Audio

2012-01-05T12:53:44Z

Nagelstudio: /* Audio Related CC Blog Posts */

[[Category:Media]]

This is a list of Creative Commons licensed audio media. [http://creativecommons.org/audio The original page] is partially ported here.

== Featured Audio Sites ==

{{#ask:
[[Format::Sound]]
|?mainurl=Website
|?size=Size
|limit=100
|mainlabel=Name
}}

== [[Podcasting Legal Guide]] ==

Inspired by the Electronic Frontier Foundation's [http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/ Legal Guide for Bloggers], the Podcasting Legal Guide is designed to outline both legal and practical issues that are specifically relevant for podcasters, such as using music and video in a podcast.

== Audio Related CC Blog Posts ==
* [http://ferienwohnungen1.blogspot.com Audio Recording in 2001]
* [http://www.nagelstudio-harburg.com Audio Submissions]
* [http://fashionstylings.blogspot.com Recording Audio]
* [http://www.nagelstudiohamburg.net Audio Recording in Hamburg]
* [http://www.nagelstudio-hamburg.net Sourrounding Audio Edits]
* [http://dieversicherungen.blogspot.com Audio Editing in the Future]
* [http://goldneu.blogspot.com Audio - next Generation]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4225 This week in amateur radio]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4161 The Metaphysician]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4159 Audioscrobbler]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4114 Books on MP3: Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4009 zug's protest song]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3985 Electrobel music community]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3879 Loca Records]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3840 Fray Audio archive]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3803 The Speech Accent Archive]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3744 Opsound in Action]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3741 The Phoenix Trap]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3700 Erik Ostrom]
* Please add to the list

Audio

2012-01-05T12:52:23Z

Nagelstudio: /* Audio Related CC Blog Posts */

[[Category:Media]]

This is a list of Creative Commons licensed audio media. [http://creativecommons.org/audio The original page] is partially ported here.

== Featured Audio Sites ==

{{#ask:
[[Format::Sound]]
|?mainurl=Website
|?size=Size
|limit=100
|mainlabel=Name
}}

== [[Podcasting Legal Guide]] ==

Inspired by the Electronic Frontier Foundation's [http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/ Legal Guide for Bloggers], the Podcasting Legal Guide is designed to outline both legal and practical issues that are specifically relevant for podcasters, such as using music and video in a podcast.

== Audio Related CC Blog Posts ==
* [http://ferienwohnungen1.blogspot.com Audio Recording in 2001]
* [http://www.nagelstudio-harburg.com Audio Submissions]
* [http://fashionstylings.blogspot.com Recording Audio]
* [http://www.nagelstudio-hamburg.net Audio Recording in Hamburg]
* [http://www.nagelstudio-hamburg.net Sourrounding Audio Edits]
* [http://dieversicherungen.blogspot.com Audio Editing in the Future
* [http://goldneu.blogspot.com Audio - next Generation]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4225 This week in amateur radio]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4161 The Metaphysician]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4159 Audioscrobbler]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4114 Books on MP3: Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4009 zug's protest song]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3985 Electrobel music community]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3879 Loca Records]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3840 Fray Audio archive]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3803 The Speech Accent Archive]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3744 Opsound in Action]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3741 The Phoenix Trap]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3700 Erik Ostrom]
* Please add to the list

Audio

2011-11-28T16:54:25Z

Nagelstudio:

[[Category:Media]]

This is a list of Creative Commons licensed audio media. [http://creativecommons.org/audio The original page] is partially ported here.

== Featured Audio Sites ==

{{#ask:
[[Format::Sound]]
|?mainurl=Website
|?size=Size
|limit=100
|mainlabel=Name
}}

== [[Podcasting Legal Guide]] ==

Inspired by the Electronic Frontier Foundation's [http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/ Legal Guide for Bloggers], the Podcasting Legal Guide is designed to outline both legal and practical issues that are specifically relevant for podcasters, such as using music and video in a podcast.

== Audio Related CC Blog Posts ==

* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4225 This week in amateur radio]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4161 The Metaphysician]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4159 Audioscrobbler]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4114 Books on MP3: Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4009 zug's protest song]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3985 Electrobel music community]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3879 Loca Records]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3840 Fray Audio archive]
* [http://www.nagelstudio-harburg.com Audio Submissions]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3803 The Speech Accent Archive]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3744 Opsound in Action]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3741 The Phoenix Trap]
* [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/3700 Erik Ostrom]
* Please add to the list