Creative Commons - User contributions [en]

RDFa

2013-10-16T18:38:32Z

Nurhusien Hasen: /* cc:attributionName/cc:attributionURL */

RDFa is a way of expressing RDF in XHTML. Creative Commons uses RDFa to express license and other information about works for the semantic web. When you select a license in our [http://creativecommons.org/license license chooser], you are given a snippet of HTML that contains RDFa. Sites like [http://www.thingiverse.com Thingiverse] have implemented RDFa across their platform so that every object uploaded expresses semantic information about itself to machines.

By using RDFa, Creative Commons is helping build the semantic web. Here are some frequently asked questions which can help you understand RDFa and the semantic web.

=What is the point of the semantic web?=
Traditionally, machines have had a very poor understanding of what humans are actually talking about when they create content. Computers may understand that a file is a text file or another file is an image file, but they typically don't understand what knowledge, or semantics, are expressed inside that file. This has been remedied to some extent by metadata such as [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tag_(metadata) tags] or [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EXIF EXIF data].

But to a machine, the web is merely a heap of human-readable-data that needs to be classified by seemingly arbitrary rules. Google and other search engines have engineered meaning out of how humans create HTML documents. By interpreting a link expressed in HTML as a semantically meaningful "vote" for another page, Google can accurately value and rank all linked pages on the web.

While incoming links are good semantic indicators of value (or popularity) of a page, web pages should be able to express much more sophisticated statements to machines. Currently, web pages only express sophisticated statements to humans, but this can change.

Furthermore, humans should have the ability to query these knowledge statements in sophisticated ways. Just think if you could ask a question to Google about how many US presidents were born in Kentucky and receive an answer not because Google had somehow magically interpreted what you meant, but simply because Google maintained a database of statements about presidents and Kentucky that was trivially easy to query?

The vision behind the semantic web is that storing and retrieving information on the web should not require machines parsing human language but rather machines parsing machine language. The web has the potential to offer massive amounts of structured information in conjunction with the massive amounts of unstructured information that already exists and if we are careful to create the proper standards and platforms that can render these statements, then the semantic web will become a reality.

=What is RDF?=
RDF stands for "Resource Description Framework" which is not a particularly informative acronym. Put simply, RDF is the way information is expressed semantically on the web. RDF is constituted by ''triples'' which are subject-predicate-objects statements. This lets machines understand human knowledge statements. When many triples are aggregated they are stored in what's called a "triple store." By querying a triple store, we can learn information that might otherwise be hard to gather by just browsing the web with our eyes. As the semantic web evolves, it will become easier to query triple stores using natural language, and hopefully, discover things we wouldn't have ordinarily.

=What is an RDF triple?=
An RDF triple can formed from any semantically meaningful statement. Here are some examples:
<pre><This website> <has> <a wiki>.
<That photo> <is licensed under> <a Creative Commons Attribution license>.</pre>
Depending on the format chosen, RDF triples can live inside an XML or XHTML file.

=What is RDFa?=
RDFa is a way of expressing RDF triples inside XHTML pages using span tags.

This makes it much easier for people to casually express semantic information in conjunction with a normal web page. While there are many ways to express RDF (such as in serialized XML files that live next to standard web pages), RDFa helps machines and humans read exactly the same content.

=Why does CC use RDFa?=
Creative Commons licenses are expressed in three different formats: the human readable license deed, the lawyer readable legal code, and the machine readable code. RDFa is one of the ways in which we've chosen to make our licenses machine readable. By using RDFa CC licensed objects can be discovered by search engines and auto-discovery mechanisms without the need for a human to hand-curate content directories or lists.

Moreover, by using RDFa CC has made our licenses and their meta data compatible with a larger movement towards the open standard of a semantic web.

=How does CC use RDFa?=
When creators fill out the "Additional Information" section of our license chooser form, they are given a snippet of XHTML code that contains an image badge, a link to our license, some text, and some span tags. Inside these span tags, RDFa is expressed.

Let's take a look at some example code to learn more about RDFa:

<pre>
<a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/">
<img alt="Creative Commons License" style="border-width:0"
src="http://i.creativecommons.org/l/by/3.0/us/88x31.png" /></a> 
RDFa FAQ by <a
xmlns:cc="http://creativecommons.org/ns#" href="www.example.com"
property="cc:attributionName" rel="cc:attributionURL">John Doe</a>
is licensed under a <a rel="license"
href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/">Creative Commons
Attribution 3.0 United States License</a>. Based on a work at
<a xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" href="http://wiki.creativecommons.org/RDFa"
rel="dc:source">wiki.creativecommons.org</a>. 
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at <a
xmlns:cc="http://creativecommons.org/ns#" href="http://moreperms"
rel="cc:morePermissions">http://moreperms</a>.
</pre>
==Breaking Down RDFa==
===dc:title/dc:type===
dc represents "Dublin Core" which is one of the oldest vocabularies or schemas on the semantic web. The full dublin core is available [http://purl.org/dc/ here]. It allows one to express typical things like a work's title, or its date. Here you can CC using this to express the work's title which I've fictitiously named RDFa FAQ.

<pre>
RDFa FAQ</pre>

CC is using a XML name-space abbreviation or "xmlns" for short. This enables CC to use shorthand to refer to the dublin core schema. Instead of having to repeatedly state a URL such as http://purl.org/dc/title to reference the title property, we can simply use dc: and achieve the same thing. This principle works across all RDF.

The dc:type references the Dublin Core definition for "Text" using the rel tag. Rel is used to specify the attribute's relationship to another resource. When rel is used inside a anchor tag, it is specifying that the document at the URL in the href attribute is of a particular relationship to the work. In this case that relationship is the Dublin Core "Type" attribute, and the href is the DC Text specification. Another document Type that could be specified with the href is http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage or http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Sound, depending on the medium being licensed.
===cc:attributionName/cc:attributionURL===
In this case, CC is using its own XML namespace, abbreviated using cc:
<pre><a xmlns:cc="http://creativecommons.org/ns#"
href="http://www.example.com" property="cc:attributionName"
rel="cc:attributionURL">John Doe</a></pre>
Again, the property is CC's AttributionName attribute, the value is the content inside the anchor tag (in this case, the fictitious John Doe), and a relationship of cc:AttributionURL is defined as being http://www.example.com.
<a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/"><img alt="Creative Commons License" style="border-width:0" src="http://i.creativecommons.org/l/by/3.0/88x31.png" /></a> This work is licensed under a <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/">Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License</a>.
Find Licence cc Attention URL.cc Attention name and Attention 3.0 unported Licence serves from my creativecommons.org
Nurhusien Hasen

===dc:source===
Similar to dc:title, dc:source specifies where the original source of the file is located.
<pre>Based on a work at <a xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
href="http://wiki.creativecommons.org/RDFa" rel="dc:source">
wiki.creativecommons.org</a></pre>
In this case it is pointing to this document.
===cc:morePermissions===
Finally, as part of the CC+ protocol, creators can specify a URL where re-users of CC licenses can obtain more rights to the work. Visit the CC+ page for more information and examples of CC+ in action. Here, the nonexistent URL of http://moreperms is used as a placeholder.
<pre>Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at <a
xmlns:cc="http://creativecommons.org/ns#" href="http://moreperms"
rel="cc:morePermissions">http://moreperms</a>.</pre>
Nurhusien Hasen

==CC Deeds using RDFa and Javascript==
CC licenses scrape RDFa metadata from referring pages in order to create a "live" box on the Deed page that suggests how to attribute the work:
[[Image:Attribution box via RDFa and Javascript.png]]
This will allow reusers to easily and properly attribute CC licensed works using RDFa.

=What does it mean that RDFa is a W3C recommendation?=
The [http://www.w3.org World Wide Web Consortium] agrees to recommend certain standards for helping the web run smoothly. One of those recommendations is that [http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-rdfa-syntax-20081014/ RDFa be used to expressed license information on the semantic web].

=How do I use RDFa?=
==If you're a creator using CC licenses==
Make sure to fill out the "Additional Information" box when selecting your license.
==If you're a user of CC licensed works==
Make sure to copy the attribution XHTML from the license deed if it is available. Otherwise, feel free to roll your own RDFa span tags.
==I'm a developer, how do I implement RDFa into my platform?==
Implementing RDFa into your platform shouldn't require much more work than implementing CC, it's merely a matter of adding a couple more print statements inside the RDFa framework detailed above. Just make sure you swap out John Doe's name with the user's name, and fill in the proper license URLs.

=Content discovery=
A key use case for RDFa is the annotation of resources included or embedded in web pages. Existing annotations apply to the current document. For example, http://example.com/foo contains
<nowiki><a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/">cc</a></nowiki>
This says that http://example.com/foo is licensed under CC BY 3.0. What about <nowiki>http://example.com/bar.jpg</nowiki> which is displayed in http://example.com/foo via a <nowiki><img src="/bar.jpg"></nowiki> element?

To specify that bar.jpg is licensed, even under a different license, we can qualify the link with an about attribute:
<nowiki><a about="/bar.jpg" rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/">cc</a></nowiki>
Found in http://example.com/foo this says <nowiki>http://example.com/bar.jpg</nowiki> is licensed under CC BY-NC 3.0.

See [http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/primer/#qualifying-other-documents Qualifying Other Documents and Document Chunks] in the RDFa primer for more examples.

The [http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/impl/js/ RDFa highlighter bookmarklet] provides visual cues for statements about included resources.

The [https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/lmojbfnaigeibgkhacnebnpbhddpnoam RDFa Triples Lister] (for the Google Chrome browser) can help one identify the triples listed on a particular page.

== CC Tools ==

RDFa is used or supported in the following CC tools:

* '''License Deeds''' When visiting a license deed (for example, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/), the deed loads Javascript which looks at the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_REFERER referrer] for RDFa. If it finds attribution or network membership metadata, this is displayed on the deed.
* [[MozCC]] (see [[What's New in MozCC 2]])
* [[RdfaDict]] is a Python RDFa parser

==References==
* http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/primer/
* http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/
* [http://rdfa.info RDFa.info]
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RDFa Wikipedia article]
* [http://esw.w3.org/topic/RDFa RDFa @ the W3 Wiki]

==Presentations==
* http://ben.adida.net/presentations/w3c-2006-04-06/html/w3c
* http://ben.adida.net/presentations/semantic-2006-03-08.pdf
* http://skimstone.x-port.net/introduction-to-rdfa

[[Category:Developer]]
[[Category:Metadata]]

RDFa

2013-10-15T23:05:06Z

Nurhusien Hasen: /* cc:morePermissions */

RDFa is a way of expressing RDF in XHTML. Creative Commons uses RDFa to express license and other information about works for the semantic web. When you select a license in our [http://creativecommons.org/license license chooser], you are given a snippet of HTML that contains RDFa. Sites like [http://www.thingiverse.com Thingiverse] have implemented RDFa across their platform so that every object uploaded expresses semantic information about itself to machines.

By using RDFa, Creative Commons is helping build the semantic web. Here are some frequently asked questions which can help you understand RDFa and the semantic web.

=What is the point of the semantic web?=
Traditionally, machines have had a very poor understanding of what humans are actually talking about when they create content. Computers may understand that a file is a text file or another file is an image file, but they typically don't understand what knowledge, or semantics, are expressed inside that file. This has been remedied to some extent by metadata such as [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tag_(metadata) tags] or [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EXIF EXIF data].

But to a machine, the web is merely a heap of human-readable-data that needs to be classified by seemingly arbitrary rules. Google and other search engines have engineered meaning out of how humans create HTML documents. By interpreting a link expressed in HTML as a semantically meaningful "vote" for another page, Google can accurately value and rank all linked pages on the web.

While incoming links are good semantic indicators of value (or popularity) of a page, web pages should be able to express much more sophisticated statements to machines. Currently, web pages only express sophisticated statements to humans, but this can change.

Furthermore, humans should have the ability to query these knowledge statements in sophisticated ways. Just think if you could ask a question to Google about how many US presidents were born in Kentucky and receive an answer not because Google had somehow magically interpreted what you meant, but simply because Google maintained a database of statements about presidents and Kentucky that was trivially easy to query?

The vision behind the semantic web is that storing and retrieving information on the web should not require machines parsing human language but rather machines parsing machine language. The web has the potential to offer massive amounts of structured information in conjunction with the massive amounts of unstructured information that already exists and if we are careful to create the proper standards and platforms that can render these statements, then the semantic web will become a reality.

=What is RDF?=
RDF stands for "Resource Description Framework" which is not a particularly informative acronym. Put simply, RDF is the way information is expressed semantically on the web. RDF is constituted by ''triples'' which are subject-predicate-objects statements. This lets machines understand human knowledge statements. When many triples are aggregated they are stored in what's called a "triple store." By querying a triple store, we can learn information that might otherwise be hard to gather by just browsing the web with our eyes. As the semantic web evolves, it will become easier to query triple stores using natural language, and hopefully, discover things we wouldn't have ordinarily.

=What is an RDF triple?=
An RDF triple can formed from any semantically meaningful statement. Here are some examples:
<pre><This website> <has> <a wiki>.
<That photo> <is licensed under> <a Creative Commons Attribution license>.</pre>
Depending on the format chosen, RDF triples can live inside an XML or XHTML file.

=What is RDFa?=
RDFa is a way of expressing RDF triples inside XHTML pages using span tags.

This makes it much easier for people to casually express semantic information in conjunction with a normal web page. While there are many ways to express RDF (such as in serialized XML files that live next to standard web pages), RDFa helps machines and humans read exactly the same content.

=Why does CC use RDFa?=
Creative Commons licenses are expressed in three different formats: the human readable license deed, the lawyer readable legal code, and the machine readable code. RDFa is one of the ways in which we've chosen to make our licenses machine readable. By using RDFa CC licensed objects can be discovered by search engines and auto-discovery mechanisms without the need for a human to hand-curate content directories or lists.

Moreover, by using RDFa CC has made our licenses and their meta data compatible with a larger movement towards the open standard of a semantic web.

=How does CC use RDFa?=
When creators fill out the "Additional Information" section of our license chooser form, they are given a snippet of XHTML code that contains an image badge, a link to our license, some text, and some span tags. Inside these span tags, RDFa is expressed.

Let's take a look at some example code to learn more about RDFa:

<pre>
<a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/">
<img alt="Creative Commons License" style="border-width:0"
src="http://i.creativecommons.org/l/by/3.0/us/88x31.png" /></a> 
RDFa FAQ by <a
xmlns:cc="http://creativecommons.org/ns#" href="www.example.com"
property="cc:attributionName" rel="cc:attributionURL">John Doe</a>
is licensed under a <a rel="license"
href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/">Creative Commons
Attribution 3.0 United States License</a>. Based on a work at
<a xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" href="http://wiki.creativecommons.org/RDFa"
rel="dc:source">wiki.creativecommons.org</a>. 
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at <a
xmlns:cc="http://creativecommons.org/ns#" href="http://moreperms"
rel="cc:morePermissions">http://moreperms</a>.
</pre>
==Breaking Down RDFa==
===dc:title/dc:type===
dc represents "Dublin Core" which is one of the oldest vocabularies or schemas on the semantic web. The full dublin core is available [http://purl.org/dc/ here]. It allows one to express typical things like a work's title, or its date. Here you can CC using this to express the work's title which I've fictitiously named RDFa FAQ.

<pre>
RDFa FAQ</pre>

CC is using a XML name-space abbreviation or "xmlns" for short. This enables CC to use shorthand to refer to the dublin core schema. Instead of having to repeatedly state a URL such as http://purl.org/dc/title to reference the title property, we can simply use dc: and achieve the same thing. This principle works across all RDF.

The dc:type references the Dublin Core definition for "Text" using the rel tag. Rel is used to specify the attribute's relationship to another resource. When rel is used inside a anchor tag, it is specifying that the document at the URL in the href attribute is of a particular relationship to the work. In this case that relationship is the Dublin Core "Type" attribute, and the href is the DC Text specification. Another document Type that could be specified with the href is http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage or http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Sound, depending on the medium being licensed.
===cc:attributionName/cc:attributionURL===
In this case, CC is using its own XML namespace, abbreviated using cc:
<pre><a xmlns:cc="http://creativecommons.org/ns#"
href="http://www.example.com" property="cc:attributionName"
rel="cc:attributionURL">John Doe</a></pre>
Again, the property is CC's AttributionName attribute, the value is the content inside the anchor tag (in this case, the fictitious John Doe), and a relationship of cc:AttributionURL is defined as being http://www.example.com.
<a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/"><img alt="Creative Commons License" style="border-width:0" src="http://i.creativecommons.org/l/by/3.0/88x31.png" /></a> This work is licensed under a <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/">Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License</a>.

===dc:source===
Similar to dc:title, dc:source specifies where the original source of the file is located.
<pre>Based on a work at <a xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
href="http://wiki.creativecommons.org/RDFa" rel="dc:source">
wiki.creativecommons.org</a></pre>
In this case it is pointing to this document.
===cc:morePermissions===
Finally, as part of the CC+ protocol, creators can specify a URL where re-users of CC licenses can obtain more rights to the work. Visit the CC+ page for more information and examples of CC+ in action. Here, the nonexistent URL of http://moreperms is used as a placeholder.
<pre>Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at <a
xmlns:cc="http://creativecommons.org/ns#" href="http://moreperms"
rel="cc:morePermissions">http://moreperms</a>.</pre>
Nurhusien Hasen

==CC Deeds using RDFa and Javascript==
CC licenses scrape RDFa metadata from referring pages in order to create a "live" box on the Deed page that suggests how to attribute the work:
[[Image:Attribution box via RDFa and Javascript.png]]
This will allow reusers to easily and properly attribute CC licensed works using RDFa.

=What does it mean that RDFa is a W3C recommendation?=
The [http://www.w3.org World Wide Web Consortium] agrees to recommend certain standards for helping the web run smoothly. One of those recommendations is that [http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-rdfa-syntax-20081014/ RDFa be used to expressed license information on the semantic web].

=How do I use RDFa?=
==If you're a creator using CC licenses==
Make sure to fill out the "Additional Information" box when selecting your license.
==If you're a user of CC licensed works==
Make sure to copy the attribution XHTML from the license deed if it is available. Otherwise, feel free to roll your own RDFa span tags.
==I'm a developer, how do I implement RDFa into my platform?==
Implementing RDFa into your platform shouldn't require much more work than implementing CC, it's merely a matter of adding a couple more print statements inside the RDFa framework detailed above. Just make sure you swap out John Doe's name with the user's name, and fill in the proper license URLs.

=Content discovery=
A key use case for RDFa is the annotation of resources included or embedded in web pages. Existing annotations apply to the current document. For example, http://example.com/foo contains
<nowiki><a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/">cc</a></nowiki>
This says that http://example.com/foo is licensed under CC BY 3.0. What about <nowiki>http://example.com/bar.jpg</nowiki> which is displayed in http://example.com/foo via a <nowiki><img src="/bar.jpg"></nowiki> element?

To specify that bar.jpg is licensed, even under a different license, we can qualify the link with an about attribute:
<nowiki><a about="/bar.jpg" rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/">cc</a></nowiki>
Found in http://example.com/foo this says <nowiki>http://example.com/bar.jpg</nowiki> is licensed under CC BY-NC 3.0.

See [http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/primer/#qualifying-other-documents Qualifying Other Documents and Document Chunks] in the RDFa primer for more examples.

The [http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/impl/js/ RDFa highlighter bookmarklet] provides visual cues for statements about included resources.

The [https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/lmojbfnaigeibgkhacnebnpbhddpnoam RDFa Triples Lister] (for the Google Chrome browser) can help one identify the triples listed on a particular page.

== CC Tools ==

RDFa is used or supported in the following CC tools:

* '''License Deeds''' When visiting a license deed (for example, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/), the deed loads Javascript which looks at the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_REFERER referrer] for RDFa. If it finds attribution or network membership metadata, this is displayed on the deed.
* [[MozCC]] (see [[What's New in MozCC 2]])
* [[RdfaDict]] is a Python RDFa parser

==References==
* http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/primer/
* http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/
* [http://rdfa.info RDFa.info]
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RDFa Wikipedia article]
* [http://esw.w3.org/topic/RDFa RDFa @ the W3 Wiki]

==Presentations==
* http://ben.adida.net/presentations/w3c-2006-04-06/html/w3c
* http://ben.adida.net/presentations/semantic-2006-03-08.pdf
* http://skimstone.x-port.net/introduction-to-rdfa

[[Category:Developer]]
[[Category:Metadata]]

CC Network Development

2013-10-15T21:50:26Z

Nurhusien Hasen: /* Documentation */

CC Network will be launched October 15, 2008. Code is licensed under the [http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/agpl-3.0.html Affero GPL 3] and is available in the CC [http://code.creativecommons.org git repository].

== Checkout ==

You can checkout the code using the following command:

$ git clone git://code.creativecommons.org/commoner.git

Nurhusien Hasen

== Documentation ==

Preliminary documentation for the application is available at http://code.creativecommons.org/doc/commoner/.
Nurhusien Hasen

== Issues ==

File bugs and feature requests here:

http://code.creativecommons.org/issues

[[Category:CC Network]]

CC Network Development

2013-10-15T21:45:51Z

Nurhusien Hasen: /* Checkout */

CC Network will be launched October 15, 2008. Code is licensed under the [http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/agpl-3.0.html Affero GPL 3] and is available in the CC [http://code.creativecommons.org git repository].

== Checkout ==

You can checkout the code using the following command:

$ git clone git://code.creativecommons.org/commoner.git

Nurhusien Hasen

== Documentation ==

Preliminary documentation for the application is available at http://code.creativecommons.org/doc/commoner/.

== Issues ==

File bugs and feature requests here:

http://code.creativecommons.org/issues

[[Category:CC Network]]

CC REL

2013-10-15T21:24:00Z

Nurhusien Hasen: <Nuru>/<Nuru>

{{Infobox|
'''Creative Commons Rights Expression Language (CC REL)''' is a specification describing how license information may be described using RDF and how license information may be attached to works.
|}}

CC REL is described in ''[[Media:Ccrel-1.0.pdf|CC REL: The Creative Commons Rights Expression Language]]'' (pdf), published March 3, 2008. An overview of the vocabulary is available with [http://creativecommons.org/ns# the namespace description].

CC REL metadata, as encoded using [[RDFa]] or [[XMP]], may be [[Marking Works Technical|embedded]] in a variety of [[:Category:Filetype|filetypes]]. Additional confidence may be added to embedded metadata through the use of [[WebStatement|web statement]].

We have also begun to explore extending CC REL for use by digital copyright registries. See [[CC Network Development]]'s [http://code.creativecommons.org/doc/commoner/metadata.html metadata documentation].

'''[http://labs.creativecommons.org/2011/ccrel-guide/ CC REL by Example]''' provides examples of many web deployment scenarios with thorough explanations and is the best place to start if you want a HOWTO or to understand through examples which you can copy and experiment with.

== Presentations ==

* A slightly updated version of the CC REL paper is chapter 10 of [http://www.communia-association.org/wp-content/uploads/the_digital_public_domain.pdf The Digital Public Domain: Foundations for an Open Culture] (pdf), 2012
* [[Creative Commons Technology Summit 2009-06-26]], multiple
* [[Creative Commons Technology Summit 2008-12-12]], multiple
* [[An Introduction to CC REL and The Use of Semantic Technology at Creative Commons]]
* [[CC REL update]]
* [[Creative Commons Technology Summit 2008-06-18]], multiple
* [[Deploying the Semantic Web with ccREL and RDFa]]
* [[COMMUNIA January 2008]]

== Examples ==

=== Simple ===
<pre>
the study by VOLKAN TEMEL is licensed under a

<a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/">Creative Commons
Attribution Non-Commercial 3.0 License</a>.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at
<a xmlns:cc="http://creativecommons.org/ns#" rel="cc:morePermissions"
href="http://www.hindawi.com/journal/arp/

=== Advanced ===
<pre>


My Book by
<a rel="cc:attributionURL" property="cc:attributionName" href="http://rejon.org/my_book">Jon Phillips</a>

is licensed under a

<a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/">Creative Commons
Attribution Non-Commercial 3.0 License</a>.


Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at
<a rel="cc:morePermissions"
href="http://somecompany.com/revenue_sharing_agreement">somecompany.com</a>.


</pre>

{{Challenge Enabled}}

{{Translations
| articles=Pt:CC REL, Ru:CC REL
}}

[[Category:Metadata]]
[[Category:Developer]]

Find create commons Rights Langoug to Licence and worck serves
Nurhusien Hasen

CC Search

2013-10-14T15:01:40Z

Nurhusien Hasen: /* What is Creative Commons? */

http://search.creativecommons.org will help you find photos, music, text, books, educational material, and more that is free to share or build upon utilizing Creative Commons enabled search services at [http://www.google.com/advanced_search Google] and [http://flickr.com/search/advanced/ Flickr]. You can also access this tool via the [http://getfirefox.com Firefox web browser]. Find out more about [[Firefox and CC Search]].

==Why is this important?==

Copyright applies fully and automatically to any work -- a photograph, a song, a web page, an article, pretty much any form of expression -- the moment it is created. This means that if you want to copy and re-use a creative work you find online, you usually have to ask the author's permission.

This "all rights reserved" protection is a good thing for many authors and artists. But what about those who want you to use their work freely without permission -- but on certain conditions?

This search service helps you quickly find those authors and the work they have marked as free to use with only "some rights reserved." If you respect the rights they have reserved (which will be clearly marked, as you'll see) then you can use the work without having to contact them and ask. In some cases, you may even find work in the public domain -- that is, free for any use with "no rights reserved."

==Examples==

Looking for a picture of a giraffe for a school report? Type "giraffe," choose the Flickr tab, and [http://search.creativecommons.org/?q=giraffe&engine=flickr see what you find].

Interested in music free to download and put in a movie? Type the kind of music you're looking for, choose the Google or Yahoo! tabs, and browse results from across the web.

Try it out. Look for books, weblogs, audio recordings, and more.

You can also browse specific repositories of Creative Commons licensed content by clicking on [[Content Curators|Content Directories]].

==Does CC Search only return CC-licensed content?==

search.creativecommons.org offers convenient access to search services provided by other independent organizations. Selecting different search options within the result list -- particularly Image
search for Google and Yahoo -- may lead to the inclusion of results which are not Creative Commons licensed.

You should always verify that the work you are re-using has a Creative Commmons license attached to it.

==What is Creative Commons?==

We're a nonprofit, so this search tool is free to use. Learn more about us at http://creativecommons.org.
Find free search tool serves from my freand http://creativecommons.org
Nurhusien Hasen

==What's next for the CC Search tool?==

*[[Translating CC Tools|Internationalization (i18n)]]
*Add more CC enabled search options

==Developers==

* The [http://code.creativecommons.org/viewgit/search.git/ source code] for CC Search is available in CC's git repository.
* Submit bugs on the CC [http://code.creativecommons.org/issues/ bug tracker].

====Adding your search engine to CC Search====

*[[CC Search integration]] concerning adding your search engine to the CC Search interface. Note that being added to the search.creativecommons.org interface is entirely at the discretion of Creative Commons. Fulfilling technical requirements is no guarantee of usefulness, nor of being added to the interface.
*[[CC OpenSearch]] -- OpenSearch is an entirely different metasearch technology facilitating search aggregation and alternative search interfaces via search result feeds.

[[Category:Search]]

{{Challenge Enabled}}
Nurhusien Hasen

CC Search

2013-10-13T20:56:17Z

Nurhusien Hasen: /* Adding your search engine to CC Search */

http://search.creativecommons.org will help you find photos, music, text, books, educational material, and more that is free to share or build upon utilizing Creative Commons enabled search services at [http://www.google.com/advanced_search Google] and [http://flickr.com/search/advanced/ Flickr]. You can also access this tool via the [http://getfirefox.com Firefox web browser]. Find out more about [[Firefox and CC Search]].

==Why is this important?==

Copyright applies fully and automatically to any work -- a photograph, a song, a web page, an article, pretty much any form of expression -- the moment it is created. This means that if you want to copy and re-use a creative work you find online, you usually have to ask the author's permission.

This "all rights reserved" protection is a good thing for many authors and artists. But what about those who want you to use their work freely without permission -- but on certain conditions?

This search service helps you quickly find those authors and the work they have marked as free to use with only "some rights reserved." If you respect the rights they have reserved (which will be clearly marked, as you'll see) then you can use the work without having to contact them and ask. In some cases, you may even find work in the public domain -- that is, free for any use with "no rights reserved."

==Examples==

Looking for a picture of a giraffe for a school report? Type "giraffe," choose the Flickr tab, and [http://search.creativecommons.org/?q=giraffe&engine=flickr see what you find].

Interested in music free to download and put in a movie? Type the kind of music you're looking for, choose the Google or Yahoo! tabs, and browse results from across the web.

Try it out. Look for books, weblogs, audio recordings, and more.

You can also browse specific repositories of Creative Commons licensed content by clicking on [[Content Curators|Content Directories]].

==Does CC Search only return CC-licensed content?==

search.creativecommons.org offers convenient access to search services provided by other independent organizations. Selecting different search options within the result list -- particularly Image
search for Google and Yahoo -- may lead to the inclusion of results which are not Creative Commons licensed.

You should always verify that the work you are re-using has a Creative Commmons license attached to it.

==What is Creative Commons?==

We're a nonprofit, so this search tool is free to use. Learn more about us at http://creativecommons.org.

==What's next for the CC Search tool?==

*[[Translating CC Tools|Internationalization (i18n)]]
*Add more CC enabled search options

==Developers==

* The [http://code.creativecommons.org/viewgit/search.git/ source code] for CC Search is available in CC's git repository.
* Submit bugs on the CC [http://code.creativecommons.org/issues/ bug tracker].

====Adding your search engine to CC Search====

*[[CC Search integration]] concerning adding your search engine to the CC Search interface. Note that being added to the search.creativecommons.org interface is entirely at the discretion of Creative Commons. Fulfilling technical requirements is no guarantee of usefulness, nor of being added to the interface.
*[[CC OpenSearch]] -- OpenSearch is an entirely different metasearch technology facilitating search aggregation and alternative search interfaces via search result feeds.

[[Category:Search]]

{{Challenge Enabled}}
Nurhusien Hasen

Public domain

2013-10-12T23:35:12Z

Nurhusien Hasen: /* Appropedia's Public Domain Search */

When a work is in the '''public domain''', it is free for use by anyone for any purpose without restriction under copyright law. Public domain is the purest form of open/free, since no one owns or controls the material in any way.

Works that are in the public domain in one legal jurisdiction are not necessarily in the public domain worldwide. Copyright laws differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, both in duration of protection and what constitutes copyrightable subject matter. For example [http://usa.gov/copyright.shtml a US Government work] clearly in the public domain in the United States may or may not be free of copyright restrictions and in the public domain in other jurisdiction. At present, one of the only ways to be certain that a particular work is in the public domain worldwide is to see if the copyright holder has dedicated all rights to the work to the public domain by using [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC0 CC0].

Creative Commons licenses do not affect the status of a work that is in the public domain under applicable law, because our licenses only apply to works that are protected by copyright. For more information, see [[Before Licensing| our Licensing Guide]] to what you should know before you license a work using CC licenses.

Find out more about [http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain CC's public domain tools], and learn more about [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain Public Domain].

== When does a work enter the public domain? ==

This varies by country. To see when a work in the [[United States]] enters the public domain see copyright.[http://copyright.gov/pr/pdomain.html gov'][http://www.windows8softwares.com s] public domain page.

Cornell University has also provided a [http://copyright.cornell.edu/resources/publicdomain.cfm handy table about copyright ][http://itshumour.blogspot.com/2010/06/twenty-hilarious-funny-quotes.html term] and the public domain in the United States.
Find public domain serves

== Creative Commons public domain tools ==

* [[CC0]] (occasionally written as CC Zero) is a public domain dedication that allows copyright holders to place works in the public domain to the extent legally possible, worldwide.
* CC's [http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/ Public Domain Mark] allows anyone to mark a work that is already free of copyright restrictions around the world.

See http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain for more information on CC's public domain tools.

Public domain content in practice is any content without copyright. It may be freed from restrictions by the copyright, or the copyright may lapse after a certain time.

The details in practice vary between countries. More information about public domain can be found at [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain Wikipedia's article on the public domain].

== Appropedia's Public Domain Search ==

[http://appropedia.org/Appropedia%27s_Public_Domain_Search Appropedia's Public Domain Search] was started in late 2007 when it was discovered there was no effective public available. This operates on a completely different method to searches using the Creative Commons marks. It uses a manually maintained index of known sites to be public domain - thus it is does not yield 100% public results, and content must be checked to confirm public domain status. Reliability is expected to improve and feedback by users is encouraged .

As CC public domain tools become widely used, searches based on the CC marks would be expected to a take over from Appropedia's Public Domain Search.
Find public domain search serves
Nurhusien Hasen

== See also ==

* [[Cultivating the Public Domain]]
* [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/images/0/08/Publicdomainsymbolversion1.jpeg Public Domain Symbol Version 1.0]

{{Translations}}

[[Category:Public domain]]
Find public domain symbol version 1.0
Nurhusien Hasen

Public domain

2013-10-12T23:32:22Z

Nurhusien Hasen: /* See also */

When a work is in the '''public domain''', it is free for use by anyone for any purpose without restriction under copyright law. Public domain is the purest form of open/free, since no one owns or controls the material in any way.

Works that are in the public domain in one legal jurisdiction are not necessarily in the public domain worldwide. Copyright laws differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, both in duration of protection and what constitutes copyrightable subject matter. For example [http://usa.gov/copyright.shtml a US Government work] clearly in the public domain in the United States may or may not be free of copyright restrictions and in the public domain in other jurisdiction. At present, one of the only ways to be certain that a particular work is in the public domain worldwide is to see if the copyright holder has dedicated all rights to the work to the public domain by using [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC0 CC0].

Creative Commons licenses do not affect the status of a work that is in the public domain under applicable law, because our licenses only apply to works that are protected by copyright. For more information, see [[Before Licensing| our Licensing Guide]] to what you should know before you license a work using CC licenses.

Find out more about [http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain CC's public domain tools], and learn more about [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain Public Domain].

== When does a work enter the public domain? ==

This varies by country. To see when a work in the [[United States]] enters the public domain see copyright.[http://copyright.gov/pr/pdomain.html gov'][http://www.windows8softwares.com s] public domain page.

Cornell University has also provided a [http://copyright.cornell.edu/resources/publicdomain.cfm handy table about copyright ][http://itshumour.blogspot.com/2010/06/twenty-hilarious-funny-quotes.html term] and the public domain in the United States.
Find public domain serves

== Creative Commons public domain tools ==

* [[CC0]] (occasionally written as CC Zero) is a public domain dedication that allows copyright holders to place works in the public domain to the extent legally possible, worldwide.
* CC's [http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/ Public Domain Mark] allows anyone to mark a work that is already free of copyright restrictions around the world.

See http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain for more information on CC's public domain tools.

Public domain content in practice is any content without copyright. It may be freed from restrictions by the copyright, or the copyright may lapse after a certain time.

The details in practice vary between countries. More information about public domain can be found at [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain Wikipedia's article on the public domain].

== Appropedia's Public Domain Search ==

[http://appropedia.org/Appropedia%27s_Public_Domain_Search Appropedia's Public Domain Search] was started in late 2007 when it was discovered there was no effective public available. This operates on a completely different method to searches using the Creative Commons marks. It uses a manually maintained index of known sites to be public domain - thus it is does not yield 100% public results, and content must be checked to confirm public domain status. Reliability is expected to improve and feedback by users is encouraged .

As CC public domain tools become widely used, searches based on the CC marks would be expected to a take over from Appropedia's Public Domain Search.

== See also ==

* [[Cultivating the Public Domain]]
* [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/images/0/08/Publicdomainsymbolversion1.jpeg Public Domain Symbol Version 1.0]

{{Translations}}

[[Category:Public domain]]
Find public domain symbol version 1.0
Nurhusien Hasen

Public domain

2013-10-12T23:23:47Z

Nurhusien Hasen: /* When does a work enter the public domain? */

When a work is in the '''public domain''', it is free for use by anyone for any purpose without restriction under copyright law. Public domain is the purest form of open/free, since no one owns or controls the material in any way.

Works that are in the public domain in one legal jurisdiction are not necessarily in the public domain worldwide. Copyright laws differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, both in duration of protection and what constitutes copyrightable subject matter. For example [http://usa.gov/copyright.shtml a US Government work] clearly in the public domain in the United States may or may not be free of copyright restrictions and in the public domain in other jurisdiction. At present, one of the only ways to be certain that a particular work is in the public domain worldwide is to see if the copyright holder has dedicated all rights to the work to the public domain by using [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC0 CC0].

Creative Commons licenses do not affect the status of a work that is in the public domain under applicable law, because our licenses only apply to works that are protected by copyright. For more information, see [[Before Licensing| our Licensing Guide]] to what you should know before you license a work using CC licenses.

Find out more about [http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain CC's public domain tools], and learn more about [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain Public Domain].

== When does a work enter the public domain? ==

This varies by country. To see when a work in the [[United States]] enters the public domain see copyright.[http://copyright.gov/pr/pdomain.html gov'][http://www.windows8softwares.com s] public domain page.

Cornell University has also provided a [http://copyright.cornell.edu/resources/publicdomain.cfm handy table about copyright ][http://itshumour.blogspot.com/2010/06/twenty-hilarious-funny-quotes.html term] and the public domain in the United States.
Find public domain serves

== Creative Commons public domain tools ==

* [[CC0]] (occasionally written as CC Zero) is a public domain dedication that allows copyright holders to place works in the public domain to the extent legally possible, worldwide.
* CC's [http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/ Public Domain Mark] allows anyone to mark a work that is already free of copyright restrictions around the world.

See http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain for more information on CC's public domain tools.

Public domain content in practice is any content without copyright. It may be freed from restrictions by the copyright, or the copyright may lapse after a certain time.

The details in practice vary between countries. More information about public domain can be found at [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain Wikipedia's article on the public domain].

== Appropedia's Public Domain Search ==

[http://appropedia.org/Appropedia%27s_Public_Domain_Search Appropedia's Public Domain Search] was started in late 2007 when it was discovered there was no effective public available. This operates on a completely different method to searches using the Creative Commons marks. It uses a manually maintained index of known sites to be public domain - thus it is does not yield 100% public results, and content must be checked to confirm public domain status. Reliability is expected to improve and feedback by users is encouraged .

As CC public domain tools become widely used, searches based on the CC marks would be expected to a take over from Appropedia's Public Domain Search.

== See also ==

* [[Cultivating the Public Domain]]
* [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/images/0/08/Publicdomainsymbolversion1.jpeg Public Domain Symbol Version 1.0]

{{Translations}}

[[Category:Public domain]]

Firefox and CC Search

2013-10-11T23:49:50Z

Nurhusien Hasen: /* Mac instructions */

A plugin for the [[CC Search|Creative Commons search tool]] is built into some versions of the [http://getfirefox.com Firefox web browser]. On most versions, the search box defaults to using Google. You can change your search engine by clicking on the small black arrow in the search bar. See the screenshot below.

If CC Search isn't available on your browser, you can always visit http://search.creativecommons.org directly, or see [[CC Search Browser Plugins]] for search plugins you can add to your browser.

[[Image:Firefox-search-engine-chooser.png]]

Using the drop down menu pictured above you can access the Creative Commons search tool or any other installed search engine plugin. Note that your search engine choice can only be set by you. Creative Commons never switches it for you, nor do we have any technical means to hijack the searchbar.

===Mac instructions===

Click on the logo that appears in the search box
(the CC logo, or the Google logo, for example). You will see a pull down
menu that allows you to use your mouse to select a different search
provider. Choosing "Manage search engines" allows you to add or remove
search engines of our choice, such as Flickr and Wikipedia.

It's easy to switch between search providers through the keyboard as well.
Start by clicking inside the search box, then hold down the Ctrl key (or
the Apple key on a Mac) and press the up arrow. After a few presses of the
up arrow, you should see the Google logo. To change to other providers,
you can press Ctrl (or Apple) + down. Pressing this key combination
accidentally is often the way most people enable the CC search without
knowing it!
Find search Englnes serves on the my flikr and wikipedia
Nurhusien Hasen

===Get Firefox!===

If you don't have Firefox, you can get it from http://getfirefox.com
Find firefox search working serves support fore my phone Nokia E63
Nurhusien Hasen

Firefox and CC Search

2013-10-11T23:30:55Z

Nurhusien Hasen: /* Get Firefox! */

A plugin for the [[CC Search|Creative Commons search tool]] is built into some versions of the [http://getfirefox.com Firefox web browser]. On most versions, the search box defaults to using Google. You can change your search engine by clicking on the small black arrow in the search bar. See the screenshot below.

If CC Search isn't available on your browser, you can always visit http://search.creativecommons.org directly, or see [[CC Search Browser Plugins]] for search plugins you can add to your browser.

[[Image:Firefox-search-engine-chooser.png]]

Using the drop down menu pictured above you can access the Creative Commons search tool or any other installed search engine plugin. Note that your search engine choice can only be set by you. Creative Commons never switches it for you, nor do we have any technical means to hijack the searchbar.

===Mac instructions===

Click on the logo that appears in the search box
(the CC logo, or the Google logo, for example). You will see a pull down
menu that allows you to use your mouse to select a different search
provider. Choosing "Manage search engines" allows you to add or remove
search engines of our choice, such as Flickr and Wikipedia.

It's easy to switch between search providers through the keyboard as well.
Start by clicking inside the search box, then hold down the Ctrl key (or
the Apple key on a Mac) and press the up arrow. After a few presses of the
up arrow, you should see the Google logo. To change to other providers,
you can press Ctrl (or Apple) + down. Pressing this key combination
accidentally is often the way most people enable the CC search without
knowing it!

===Get Firefox!===

If you don't have Firefox, you can get it from http://getfirefox.com
Find firefox search working serves support fore my phone Nokia E63
Nurhusien Hasen

4.0/Draft 1/Regional calls

2013-10-11T23:10:52Z

Nurhusien Hasen: /* Attribution */

=notes =
In May 2012, Creative Commons engaged with its affiliates around the world and across six regions to discuss the first draft of the version 4.0 licenses. 

These conversations gave CC the opportunity to receive targeted feedback from legal experts and others who are deeply familiar with the CC license suite, have experience advising users of the licenses in multiple domains such as education, science, culture, GLAM, data, and public sector information, and understand how the CC licenses operate under varying and sometimes quite intricate national copyright laws.

The following topics were covered in each regional meeting/call, with initial overviews of the issues provided by CC HQ (which are also included below):

# [[#Scope and operation of license: copyright, neighboring rights, moral rights and ancillary rights|Scope and operation of license: copyright, neighboring rights, moral rights and ancillary rights]]
# [[#NonCommercial definition|NonCommercial definition]]
# [[#Attribution|Attribution]]
# [[#Termination (and possible addition of cure period or materiality threshold)|Termination]]
# [[#Technical Protection Measures|Technical Protection Measures (TPMs)]]
# [[#Additional Terms (proposed)|Additional terms]]
# [[#Collecting Societies|Collecting Societies]]
# [[#Other issues raised|Other items raised (open discussion)]]

Participating jurisdictions:

Africa: Nigeria, Kenya, South Africa

Arab World: Egypt, UAE, Algeria, Oman, Qatar, Jordan, Lebanon

Asia Pacific: Japan, Taiwan, Hong Kong, New Zealand, Australia, Jordan, and South Korea

Europe: Netherlands, Ireland, UK England & Wales, Ukraine, Czech Republic, Sweden, Italy, Croatia, France, Poland, Luxembourg, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Russia, and Portugal

Latin America: Costa Rica, Puerto Rico, Guatemala, Perú, Chile, México, Brasil, and Ecuador

North America: Canada, United States

{| class="wikitable" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" width=100%
|valign="TOP" style="background:#6600CC;color:#FFFFFF;border:5px #FDAFAF;"|
'''Important Note:''' The summaries provided below are provided for informational purposes only. These summaries are not necessarily complete, may not correctly or completely reflect the views of the participants, and must not be depended upon for legally accuracy or serve as legal advice.
|}

==Scope and operation of license: copyright, neighboring rights, moral rights and ancillary rights==

The most complex and important aspect of the license is its scope. Creative Commons licenses were designed as copyright licenses - they grant permission to do things that are otherwise restricted by copyright provided certain conditions are met. The precise scope of the license in the 3.0 license suite is an open question, in part due to the nature of porting (which has resulted in more than 55 distinct suites of licenses that at times vary from the international (or unported) license suite) and therefore differ in scope. The unported v.3 licenses and most v.3 ports do not address database rights, for example, however many EU ports explicitly address database rights even though exercising those rights does not trigger compliance with license conditions.

CC has three primary goals with version 4.0: (1) to be as precise as possible about what rights are licensed so that licensors and licensees know what rights are being granted and apply, (2) to remain clear that the license only applies where permission is required, and (3) to explore ways to address rights that are in close proximity to copyright and could interfere with or prevent the exercise of rights under the license.

There are several different ways CC could approach this issue. In draft 1, we explored a two-layered approach which differentiated between rights that are subject to license conditions and rights that are affected but not subject to the license conditions. This approach was designed to trigger dialogue on the different categories of rights and different possible treatment in the license. In particular, in 4.0d1 the license is structured as follows:

'''Rights licensed and subject to license conditions:''' copyright, performance, broadcast, phonogram, database rights

'''Rights waived and not subject to license conditions:''' “ancillary,” copyright-like rights (example: exclusive right of European film producers to rent and lend copies of films, reproduce the films, and distribute the films to the public)

'''Q. Are these the correct rights to license? Is it a concern that different people may hold these rights? Are people concerned about these other ancillary rights? Is this really an issue we should try to address?'''

Africa:
* Would be useful to define neighboring and ancillary rights to give notice about what those terms are meant to include.
* Consider including folklore and traditional cultural expression rights within scope of the license.

Arab World:

* Important to be clear what is meant to be “ancillary rights” in the license. If we try to cover too many rights, it becomes confusing, especially when judges are not used to the terms. Should stick with copyright.
* By trying to mention all rights that are not affected (like patent and trademark), the license gets heavy.

Asia Pacific:

* Appreciate the desire for precision, but concerned that increasing complexity of license scope makes it more difficult for licensors to apply correctly and more complicated for licensees to understand.
* Generally good to include more rights in the license scope, but concerned about multiple rights holders and situation where licensor may not have cleared the other relevant rights to the licensed work.
* Issue of clearing other rights is a matter of due diligence for licensors before they apply a CC license.
* A similar problem arises when the licensor is not the original author of the work. From licensee’s point of view, it may not always be clear what rights are included in the license scope. Also raised idea of expanding scope to include design rights.
* Need to be careful not to expand too far beyond copyright.

Europe and North America:

* More information about the scope of the license in the preamble would be helpful to promote understanding of the license.
* Licensors should try to clear all rights (including publicity rights) to a work before licensing. This should be made clear in CC’s educational and explanatory materials (including the license chooser) if not addressed through the license itself.
* Preference for eliminating “ancillary rights” term and instead broadening definition of neighboring rights and licensing all of those rights affirmatively rather than waiving them.
* Like idea of tightly defining the rights licensed. The definition adds a lot of clarity about what is being licensed, but still concerned about ancillary and moral rights.
* Prefer an open-ended definition (e.g., “such as...”) to capture rights being licensed. Would be nice to allow rights holders to apply license if they own other rights but not copyright.
* If we leave some neighboring or other rights outside the license, the license will never be granting the full rights necessary to use the licensed work.
* Alerting licensees in the license preamble that the license may not grant all rights necessary to use the licensed work as intended could be valuable.

Latin America:

* Concerned about what happens when different people have different rights over the same work. This reflects the state of the law, but how do we make it clear to users? Perhaps consider conveying this concept in the license deed.
* Need to ensure we do not make inclusion of database rights in the license appear as an endorsement of those rights by CC.
* Proposed idea of including future rights held by licensor within scope of the license.
* To avoid allowing those who hold only obscure copyright-like rights to apply CC licenses, we could specify that license can only be applied by someone who also owns copyright. However, this raises problems where same rights - e.g., sound recordings - are considered neighboring rights in some jurisdictions and fall under copyright in others.

'''Treatment of moral rights in v.4:''' 4.01d1 is not intended to change the treatment from v.3 (international). Moral rights are waived or not asserted only to limited extent possible and necessary for licensee to reasonably exercise economic rights licensed.

'''Q. Is this the right approach to moral rights? Would it work in your jurisdictions? What would outcome be?'''

Africa:
* No specific feedback.

Arab World:
* Approach works with Lebanese law and likely other Arab countries with French copyright systems. In Lebanon, if you give someone permission to make an adaptation, you cannot later use your moral rights to prevent them from doing so unless the adaptation harms the author’s reputation.
* Current language is a bit confusing and does not specify what type of moral rights are at issue.
* Moral rights non-waivable in Egypt.
* In Egypt, authors also have a moral right to withdraw their works from publication.
* In Jordan, also have moral right of withdrawal but can also use it if you have a very serious reason for withdrawing your work.
* Language does not appear to contradict the law in any of the jurisdictions participating on the call.

Asia Pacific:
* Concern that removal of language from v.3 about not mutilating the work or harming author’s integrity will allow licensee to modify the work in a way that is prejudicial to the author’s moral right of integrity.
* Important to recognize that if licensor is not original author, the limited waiver or non-assertion of moral rights has no effect.
* Current wording of moral rights provision is very confusing. Better to leave moral rights intact.
* Keeping moral rights completely intact will mean licensees have very little, if any, right to make adaptations.

Europe and North America:
* Moral rights cannot generally be waived or licensed in Europe.
* Preference for recognition that moral rights exist and then including a simple non-assertion of moral rights to the extent those rights interfere with the operation of the license. This would comport with jurisdictions where waiver will be implied by the courts because licensor is granting the right to create adaptations.
* To increase understanding, should differentiate between economic and moral rights rather than copyright and moral rights.
* Central right at issue in CC licenses is the right of integrity. Might be helpful to call that out specifically when addressing moral rights in the license.
* If moral right of integrity were expressly retained, there would likely be confusion in the licenses that allow adaptations.
* Might make more sense to say licensor is authorizing the exercise of moral rights.
* Skeptical about mentioning moral rights at all. Language in draft 1 is probably okay though. In at least some countries, authorizing someone to create a derivative is not restricted by the moral right of integrity.
* When you authorize creation of derivative, you are inherently not asserting your moral right of integrity. Same for moral right of withdrawal where it exists.
* Agree that right of integrity is main focus, but full waiver of this right probably goes too far because licensor may still want to prevent negative uses of the work.
* May want to remove “reasonable” with regard to waiver because it is vague and leaves too much open to interpretation.

Latin America:
* Language in draft is good because it indicates the waiver does not apply in jurisdictions where waiver is not enforceable. A unilateral promise not to enforce rights is enforceable in most civil law jurisdictions, so it is good that the provision includes this as a fall back.

==NonCommercial definition==

No change from v.3 to v.4. We have included a defined term for “NonCommercial” but it uses language from prior versions and is not intended to change scope. We don’t want to change the definition without a compelling reason, both because of compatibility issues with prior versions of the licenses and so that we don’t veer from the expectations of NC licensors.

'''Q. Do people feel that changes to the NC definition should be considered? If so, what types of changes? What about clarifications outside the license text?'''

Africa:
* In favor of the “commercial rights reserved” proposal on the 4.0 wiki. It is a linguistic change rather than substantive change, but it would help in the commercial space with cultural works. The NC term is confusing, and replacing it with “commercial rights reserved” terminology would be more explanatory.
* Okay with NC definition as it is.

Arab World:
* NC is a really tricky issue, especially with the ad-supported model for content on the Internet. In proposals for clarifying the definition, it seems everyone says something different. Also, meaning of NC is constantly changing, so not sure what we can do to provide much more certainty.

Asia Pacific:
* Agree we should not change term, but could clarify what we mean by commercial outside of license text.
* One of the most frequently asked questions from the public is whether cost recovery is considered a commercial purpose.
*Not clear whether non-monetary exchange is considered a commercial purpose.

Europe and North America:
* The definition should not be changed because it is impossible to satisfy everyone.
* NC seems to be functioning well and people are generally accustomed to it.
* When there are disputes about NC, typically referring to the exact language in the current definition can resolve the issue when it is examined closely against the facts of the situation.
* Introducing clarifiers about NC would only introduce more confusion. (For example, nearly anything can be deemed “educational.”)
* There are many practical problems with changing the definition of NC, especially in terms of compatibility.

Latin America:
* Any definition will have problems. Best not to change existing definition without clear and robust arguments in favor of doing so.
* General guidelines about the NC clause may be useful.

==Attribution==

In v.4, we consolidated all attribution and marking requirements into one section and put them in list form. We also made clear that all information is required only when supplied by licensor and can be done in a reasonable manner. Last, we added a shortcut that allows licensees to include a URL to satisfy several of the requirements.

'''Q. Have we provided enough flexibility? Too much? Are there other requirements we can remove, or other shortcuts to add?'''

Africa:
* Thrilled with change because the list form is so clear. We usually spend so much time explaining how to attribute. This will make our work a lot easier.
* Like the idea of flexibility in attribution, especially to help with attribution stacking.

Arab World:
* From community perspective, it is best to make the requirements as simple and easy to follow as possible.
* Would be useful if we replaced specific attribution requirements with general statement that licensee must acknowledge author and source. Case studies and legal success stories would also be helpful.
* From a legal point of view, if we just say licensees must “acknowledge” the author and source it may not be sufficient. Need to make it clear they must identify the name of the author and source of the work.
* Should ensure that people can use pseudonyms if desired for attribution. Also, because links are the norm for indicating source in online environment, we should make a hyperlink sufficient if the reference has the relevant information.
* Minimal approach is desirable. Should mention minimum requirements with other information encouraged as norm.
* Would be useful if licensee can satisfy attribution requirements by providing link to one URI that gives all attribution information for history of the work.
* Providing name of author and source of work are sufficient to satisfy Lebanese moral rights.
* From community perspective, name and source are also sufficient.

Asia Pacific:
* Licenses need to account for specific attribution requirements of licensors.
* Changes proposed on 4.0 wiki seem to suggest changing the licenses to suit user practice, but perhaps focus should instead be on educating users to attribute properly.
* If attribution is too rigid, it may prevent some uses of licensed work down the road.
* Might consider mentioning moral rights in attribution section so that the public sees that the licenses are addressing moral rights.
* Will licensors be okay having their name replaced by a hyperlink?

Europe and North America:
* Not feasible to include too much information as part of attribution condition. Consider ways to reduce requirements.
* Consolidation and simplification of requirements in this draft is a big improvement.
* While requirements are improved, they could still be hard to implement for people who are not experts. Perhaps provide more guidance outside of the license.
* Concerned about attribution when combining licensed data.
* Concerned about imposing attribution requirement for data because moral rights in data generally do not exist.
* Would like to see set of licenses that allow licensors to waive attribution.
* Is there a method where licensor could dictate when attribution is required and when it is not? This could help eliminate the stacking problem.
* If requirement is overly simplified, there could be abuse.
* One idea is to allow licensees to point to one document that provides full history of all attributions over life of work as it is remixed.

Latin America:
* Because fulfilling the attribution requirements is a requirement that if violated results in termination, we need more flexibility. Consider softening termination clause because if this is a problem with attribution, it may be a problem with other license requirements as well.
* Attribution stacking needs to be addressed by including more information for licensees on how to deal with this problem. A technical solution to the problem would be even better.

==Termination (and possible addition of cure period or materiality threshold)==

As in prior versions, v.4 results in automatic termination upon breach by the licensee. On the 4.0 wiki and mailing lists, there have been some proposals for softening this provision. Because most disputes relating to CC licenses are handled amicably, automatic termination for any breach (whether or not intentional or egregious) seems harsh.

If CC changes course, there are two primary approaches that might be taken: (1) a materiality threshold; or (2) giving licensees a short window of time to cure the breach and reinstate their rights. (similar to the GPL)

'''Q. What do people think about changing the termination provisions? If in favor, which new approach do you prefer?'''

Africa:
*License should terminate only for fundamental breaches. License should have materiality threshold, as long as what is material is clearly outlined in license.

Arab World:
* Should research how civil law systems deal with termination to make sure it works.

Asia Pacific:
* Would encourage not changing termination unless we have clear evidence that change is necessary. Comes down to a tension between licensor and licensee interests. Perhaps a middle ground is to assume minor breaches will not be enforced as infringement.
* In favor of change to at least allow licensees to get new rights to use the work when they fix their violation. People often breach the requirements innocently.
* Urge care because license seems to be working. There are not a lot of enforcement actions brought, let alone under unjust circumstances. Would need to carefully analyze implications of change.
* Any creation of further uncertainty could be problematic.

Europe and North America:
* Opportunity to cure could work as long as license still terminated automatically.
* Reinstatement of rights may not be correct terminology because licensee is either in compliance with the license or infringing.
* Likes idea in principle. Worth pursuing further.
* Would need to be implemented cautiously, but like the approach generally.

Latin America:
* Agree we should soften termination. We should take this opportunity with version 4.0 to fix things.
* Once licensee fixes their breach, they should get their rights reinstated.
* Materiality threshold could be ambiguous, so we may want to specify what breaches are considered material and cause automatic termination. We could allow other types of breaches to be fixable. This would blend both proposed approaches.

==Technical Protection Measures==

This has historically been a controversial provision of the licenses. Licensees may not impose technological measures to restrict the ability of a recipient of the work to exercise the rights granted.

CC did not propose a change in draft 1 because we did not have enough information or input to make a formal proposal. Will expect to make a proposal in draft 2, and the current options under consideration are: (1) keep as is; (2) include a parallel distribution (can use TPM as long as modifiable version made available, too); (3) grant permission to circumvent TPM (or waive right to prohibit circumvention as in the GPL).

'''Q. Is there a compelling reason to change the TPM prohibition? Are there use cases that you are aware of?'''

Africa:
* This is a really tricky issue, especially in the education context. Schools like to use TPM because they try to monetize their content. Need to spend more time thinking about it.
* Does TPM include anti-piracy measures?
* Allowing circumvention seems to be more permissive and more in the spirit of CC. It would make the license more liberal.
* Worst option is to keep the TPM restriction. It is too restrictive. Sometimes the platform just automatically adds TPM, so the user has no choice if they want to distribute the CC-licensed material on that platform.
* Best option seems to be allowing people to use TPM and grant permission to circumvent. This allows people to use all of the different online platforms.
* Giving permission to circumvent would likely not be a problem under local law. It would also alleviate concerns about using CC-licensed content to lure people into locked platforms.

Arab World:
* Jordan has criminal anti-circumvention provision, so the waiver of circumvention approach could be problematic. Other countries that have signed free trade agreements with Europe or the United States probably do as well.
* Should think about how TPM restriction will affect coalition in music industry working to create infrastructure for copyright rights management. (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/05/21/creative_industry_bodies_copyright_single_framework/])
* Do not hear complaints about TPM restriction because most licensees do not know the requirement is there. A lot of people have no option but to upload to platforms that use DRM. For SA licenses, applying TPM would already violate license so not clear what purpose prohibition serves.

Asia Pacific:
* DRM is so ubiquitous that people need to be able to put CC-licensed content on platforms restricted by DRM. Asked questions about this issue by the public at least monthly. Not sure how to fix it, but needs to be addressed.
* Removing the restriction against TPM would go against CC’s philosophy. People can always ask licensor for permission if they want to use DRM platforms.

Europe and North America:
* Like the idea of adopting GPL approach to granting permission to circumvent. This is better than parallel distribution, which places an additional burden on licensees. However, does platform provider have right to prevent circumvention of TPM independently?
* If the circumvention provision won’t be enforceable everywhere, then we should use the parallel distribution approach. Could allow TPMs, parallel distribution and circumvention as alternative.

Latin America:
* Licensor is not often the one that can grant permission to circumvent TPM, so it is not clear how this approach would be workable.

==Additional Terms (proposed)==

4.0d1 contains a placeholder for possible inclusion of a provision that would allow licensors to include certain types of additional terms in the license. CC will include in the license the provision from v3 that reads: “You may not offer or impose any terms on the work that restrict the terms of this license or the ability of the recipient to exercise the rights granted.” (formerly Section 4a, with parallel language for Adaptations in SA licenses). Additionally, CC expects to include some provision that approximates the following provisions in v3.0: “This License constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the Work licensed here. There are no understandings, agreements or representations with respect to the Work not specified here. Licensor shall not be bound by any additional provisions that may appear in any communication from You. This License may not be modified without the mutual written agreement of the Licensor and You.”

Possible provisions that could be allowed as an additional term include warranties, granting additional permissions and providing for alternative dispute resolution options.

'''Q. Does this seem like a useful provision? Are there other considerations (things people should or should not be allowed to add to license)?'''

Africa:
* Would be very useful if licensors could add an alternative dispute mechanism.
* This will be particularly helpful in developing nations. Will there be guidelines about what types of ADR mechanism can be used?
* Arbitration would be very helpful, but there should be guidelines so it is not a costly process. Many developing nations would probably have this same sentiment.
* Will licensors be able to add a choice of law provision as well? There is a wide gulf in what is allowed in different jurisdictions, so the governing law has a large impact. Uncertain how exactly the substantive law should be chosen, but it is an issue that should be addressed at some point. Need to find a middle ground.

Arab World:
* Would need to read proposed language very carefully.
* Would want to know more about what enforceability problems a provision such as this might cause.

Asia Pacific:
* Would be useful to allow arbitration since it is a fairly major trend commercially.
* Licensors can already add terms upon release, so is new provision necessary? Would also need to think through potential enforceability problems.
* Would create severe compatibility problems and make the licenses much more complex.
* Could consider addressing the TPM problem through this mechanism.

Europe and North America:
* Warranties should be allowed to be added through this provision.
* Could be useful for corporate licensors, but unlikely to be used by others. Need to be careful about allowing additional terms into the license.
* Should be careful to ensure that work can be used by downstream licensees under standard license without additional terms.
* Can see argument why ADR mechanism should be allowed as an additional term.
* In some cases, choice of venue requires permission of venue. Would prefer it as an additional term rather than standard term of license. Probably more useful for corporate users.
* Understanding law that applies to the license is more important than choice of venue.
* ADR mechanism should be optional not mandatory because it can be very expensive and sometimes unfair. Not supportive of having arbitration as the default.
* In some countries, it would be problematic to have arbitration or ADR in CC licenses. Probably best to keep as a separate agreement.
* ADR option could be abused, so probably best to limit application to specific contexts, if allowing it all.

Latin America:
* Not clear how this would work in practice.
* Licensor can already add extra permissions to the work.
* This provision could encourage licensors to change CC licenses, which could create incompatibilities. We need to keep as much uniformity as possible.
* Not a good idea. Seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
* Comes down to a policy choice between increasing uptake of CC licensing and compatibility between licenses. Favor increased adoption because this will, in turn, lead to more material being CC licensed.

==Collecting Societies==

4.0d1 treats collecting societies the same as in v.3, while simplifying the language. The right to collect royalties (individually or through voluntary or compulsory collecting scheme) is waived to extent possible and necessary to allow exercise of the rights granted. Those rights are reserved where waiver not possible and for uses outside of license grant.

Q. Any reason to change course?

Africa:
* The provision in v.3 is working fine as is. No need to change the treatment in v.4.

Arab World:
* In Lebanon, same collecting society as France, which already has a relationship with CC.

Asia Pacific:
* Comfortable with leaving it as written in draft one.

Europe and North America:
* New language is much better and covers countries where there are non-waivable schemes. When collecting societies collect royalties on behalf of non-members, licensors should be able to obtain that money. (Note: CC is undertaking additional research on the existence of such requirements.)
* Maintain the same structure, collecting societies are accustomed to the existing language and are engaged in pilots that account for the current definition of NC.

Latin America:
* No specific feedback.

==Other issues raised==

Asia Pacific:
* Concern about lack of jurisdiction clause.
* Want to ensure definition of “Share” captures hard copy as well as electronic form.
* Consider re-inserting well-understood terms from v.3 - “distribute,” “publicly perform” - into definition of “Share.” Will ensure everything is covered.

Arab World:
* Many jurisdictions have different terms for copyright and neighboring rights. How do we deal with issue in the term of the license?
* Term “You” is difficult to translate into Arabic in a legal document. Would be useful to switch to “Licensee.”
* Other terms may cause problems in Arabic, such as “Share” (especially as it relates to “ShareAlike”).
* Problematic that no applicable law is specified. In some jurisdictions, have to be specific about reach of copyright law being licensed - range, geographic limitation, purpose.
* Would be very useful if lawyers from each affiliate team provided a list of what rights exist in their jurisdictions. This will help licensors and licensees understand what is being licensed when they apply the international license in their jurisdiction.

Europe and North America:
* Proposal made to specify choice of law for contractual and consumer law aspects of the license. Could opt for law from jurisdiction where licensor resides or has its headquarters. This proposal does not involve specifying the copyright and related law that applies, which would instead be determined by private international law.
* Would be useful to avoid any circular definitions within the license.
* At some stage in the drafting process, every phrase should be revisited to make sure what is included is precisely what is necessary and not more.

Latin America:
* In some jurisdictions in Latin America, exhaustion of copyright is not tied to the right of distribution. The license needs to include it explicitly, or licensed works may avoid limitations on exportation and importation.
* Collecting societies will resist the language in the draft about CC licenses being “perpetual.” Perhaps there is a way to word this in a different way to help accommodate collecting societies but stil being clear about how it works.
* Regarding proposal on 4.0 wiki to drop BY-NC from the suite because it is too similar to BY-NC-SA, we should retain both options regardless of technical details. BY-NC does open options for licensees because with BY-NC-SA they will feel compelled to share.

Add content directory howto

2013-10-10T22:54:55Z

Nurhusien Hasen: /* View the directory list to see that your organization or project was added */

===Navigate to the [[Content Directories]] page on CC wiki===

[[Image:addcontentdirectory-1.jpg|650px]]

'''http://www.mindsinspired.com'''[[Link title]]

http://www.mindsinspired.
Nurhusien Hasen com

===View the directory list to see that your organization or project was added===

[[Image:addcontentdirectory-4.jpg|650px]]

{{Translations
| articles = Pt:Como Adicionar Listas de Conteúdos
}}
Nurhusien Hasen

Add content directory howto

2013-10-10T22:47:00Z

Nurhusien Hasen: /* Navigate to the Content Directories page on CC wiki */

Summer of Code 2013

2013-10-10T21:15:12Z

Nurhusien Hasen: /* Project: Media Widget */

Creative Commons is participates in Google's Summer of Code as a mentoring organization. Student submissions for SoC 2013 will take place April-May; see the [http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/homepage/google/gsoc2013 GSoC 2013 homepage] for more details.

For application process and tips please see the [[Summer of Code Application]] page. If you want more information, you can send email to [mailto:dan@creativecommons.org Dan Mills], or visit our irc channel at [irc://irc.freenode.net/cc Freenode/#cc].

=== A Little Background ===

This year Creative Commons is planning to launch new products and tools to help authors and consumers use, share, and remix content. The first experiment we're launching is called [[OpenHome]], go read the wiki page for it before you continue reading this one.

'''Seriously''', go read [[OpenHome]], this page will still be right here waiting for you.

Ok? Now you (hopefully) have a general sense of what the overall project is about. You may have also [https://github.com/creativecommons/openhome checked out the code] and noticed it uses node.js--that means that to hack on it you'll need to be relatively fluent in JavaScript, but you also have to keep in mind some of the unique features of node.js: in particular, it's heavy use of non-blocking IO via asynchronous callbacks. Here is [http://book.mixu.net/ a good starter book] if you know JS but haven't used node.js before.

Here are some ideas to get you started. Keep in mind these are only starter ideas, which you can feel free to mix and match or propose something new if you think it's worth exploring.

(By the way, if you visited this page in the last couple of days, you may notice that the ideas have changed somewhat. The same ideas are still here, we just combined a few together, because they seemed too easy on their own!)

=== Project: Homepage Themes ===

; Brief Explanation
: OpenHome has a basic view which currently displays images only. However, OpenHome is meant to be a mash-up of a variety of media which includes images, documents, and more. We need smart ways to categorize, organize, and display this content. What's more, we may start by focusing on one kind of user to start with, but we will quickly need to think about other user types. This project is about creating OpenHome templates and features for two kinds of users:

: * A university professor who wants a home page for their written papers.
: * An amateur artist looking to show off their artwork and writing.

: Based on these users, we will perform user research and come up with specific needs, which we will then build our app to support. You don't need to do the user research itself--but you'll be involved in making rough prototypes we will user-test.

; Expected Results
: As mentioned before, you'll be responsible for early prototypes we will user test (for example, via [http://usertesting.com usertesting.com]), and based on that feedback we'll adjust the themes/views.

: We expect to need different styles for each user, as well as at least a few different views for the content: a "timeline" view, a "content type" view, and a "metrics" view that provides graphs/counters for how many times the content has been viewed/favorited/etc.

; Knowledge Prerequisite
: JavaScript, HTML/CSS, node.js

; Skill Level
: Medium

; Mentor
: Dan Mills or other CC tech staff member
Find progect and software serves
Nurhusien Hasen

=== Project: CC Web Content API ===

; Brief explanation
: All CC licenses require attribution when using the licensed content. We've found that for most people, though, it's too cumbersome to do it correctly--even even when they have the best intentions. Not only that, but in virtually every case, the content author would never find out that their content was used, even if it was attributed correctly.

: So, we're interested in ways of making attribution completely automatic for websites, while also providing a way for content authors to find out where their content is being used, and even a way for those using the content to send a message or give "kudos" ("thanks") to the author.

: This is where the CC Web Content API comes in: it's a JavaScript library that scans the content on a page, and communicates with the OpenHome service to find out if any of it is CC licensed. If it is, it can '''automatically''' add a widget to the content providing the correct attribution data (author, etc) as well as a couple of buttons for e.g. sending a message to the author, or marking it as a favorite.

;Expected Results
: For this to work, there are four things that need to be completed:

: 1. A way for OpenHome to fingerprint or add metadata into content when the content is first added to OpenHome. This is not the core focus of this project, but you need at least some basic metadata or fingerprinting to get to the next step.
: 2. An API for OpenHome to receive a URL and return the metadata for the file, if it is known.
: 3. A JS library that implements the CC Web Content API. The library should be easily configurable to allow scanning only certain kinds of media (e.g., only images with a certain class property), and it should also check if there is already embedded metadata on the page.
: 4. An HTML/CSS widget that the JS library will add to media files that were determined to be CC licensed. It should work on at least one kind of media file (for example, images).

; Optional
: If you want to go further, you can implement two features:

: 1. A "message author" button in the widget, which would (after a login or CAPTCHA) send a message to the author through the OpenHome service. The author can get an email, or the message can appear in a private area of their OpenHome page, whichever you prefer.
: 2. A "kudos" button. This similar (in implementation) to the message feature, but instead of a message it is simply a very easy way to say "thanks" to the author--think "favorite" or "like" button. Kudos can appear in a public section of the author's OpenHome page.

; Knowledge Prerequisite
: JavaScript, HTML/CSS, node.js

; Skill Level
: Medium

; Mentor
: Dan Mills or other CC tech staff member

=== Project: OpenAttribute Integration ===

; Brief Explanation
: Creative Commons co-developed a set of browser add-ons called [http://openattribute.com OpenAttribute]. They look for attribution metadata on a page and allow users to extract it for use elsewhere.

: This project would enable OpenAttribute to have some of the features of the JS Web Content API project (see above), even on web pages that don't explicitly use the JS Web Content API library, and because of that, there's one additional twist: we can enlist users to report back to the content author (if the author wishes it) when their content on is not being attributed correctly.

;Expected Results
: Updated OpenAttribute add-ons for at least Firefox and Chrome with the ability to detect non-marked up CC content on a webpage (by using the OpenHome API) and report it as such.

; Knowledge Prerequisite
: Firefox & Chrome add-on programming

; Skill Level
: Medium-low

; Mentor
: Dan Mills or other CC tech staff member

=== Project: Media Fingerprinting Library ===

; Brief Explanation
: CC would prefer that all content on the Web include correct licensing metadata. Alas, that is not the case. So we're interested in code that will allow us to identify a given item across the Web, even if there's no metadata alongside (or within) it. The tricky part is: people often crop or resize images, clip videos, re-encode content, or quote only pieces of text. So a simple hash is not sufficient: we need more intelligent fuzzy matching. That's what this project is about.

; Expected Results
: A library that provides two methods: 1) Given a media file, output a fingerprint, and 2) Given a file and a fingerprint, return the likelihood of the file matching the original file. You can focus your efforts on only one or two media types, or you can do more if it's possible.

: The library can be in a low-level language (C/C++) or you can use a higher-level language (JavaScript) if it's feasible. Speed is not a major concern at this point.

: Bonus: An additional API/method to detect content inside other files (e.g., a PowerPoint file that includes a CC licensed image, or a still image inside a video).

; Notes / Resources
: The first task is to decide on a strategy to compare two items and decide how similar they are. Some choices are:

: * Hamming distance (bitwise AKA Manhattan distance)
: * Euclidean distance (plane distance, also good in higher dimensions)
: * Set similarity (Jaccard index; MinHash)

: For this project, set similarity seems like the best choice. It would potentially allow us to detect works remixed into other works, if some portion of them has remained intact in some way. The technique involves distilling a document into a set of ''things'', and comparing two documents is simply the ratio of ''things'' they have in common to ''things'' they do not.

: A good way to start is with text, and involves a technique called ''shingling''. For something like images, we'll need more work to determine which "interesting" features of the image to consider (to generate the set of ''things''). This is called "keypoint extraction" and involves using standard algorithms to find vectors of floats that describe each keypoint. Since for images two keypoint vectors might be very similar but not identical, some additional work in clustering and mapping to example keypoints is required for images.

: Some reading:
: * Chapters 1 and 3 of [http://infolab.stanford.edu/~ullman/mmds.html Mining Massive Datasets]
: * [http://lingpipe-blog.com/2011/01/12/scaling-jaccard-distance-deduplication-shingling-minhash-locality-sensitive-hashi/ building shingles in text]
: * [http://nlp.stanford.edu/IR-book/ Introduction to Information Retrieval]
: * [http://opencv.org/ OpenCV] for extracting ''things'' (features) of images
: * BRISK / FREAK: algorithms for "keypoint extraction", for images
: * [http://www.phash.org/ pHash.org] might be something we can use.

; Knowledge Prerequisite
: Media formats/encodings, JavaScript, C/C++.

; Skill Level
: High

; Mentor
: Dan Mills or other CC tech staff member

=== Project: Metadata Embedding Library ===

; Brief Explanation
: In order to make it easier to track CC licensed content, it's possible to embed metadata into files (see our pages on [[XMP]] and [[Category:Filetype|filetype support]]). However, it's difficult for users to do this. We'd like to build a service that takes media files and is able to add licensing metadata, and the first step is to create a library that can do the low-level work.

; Expected Results
: A library that is able to get/set XMP metadata on as many file formats as possible. We'll make a prioritized list of file types and agree on a core set before you start. JS is preferred for the library, but it could be written in some other language and have JS bindings.
: It is preferable to have the library be interoperable with the on-disk format of [[Liblicense]]. That is not an absolute requirement, but you would need to present a detailed argument for why it would be better to break compatibility.

; Notes / Resources
: You will want to read up on the following:

: [[Liblicense]]
: [[XMP]]
: EXIF / exiv2 / exiv2node

; Knowledge Prerequisite
: JavaScript, possibly other languages/frameworks (see above).

; Skill Level
: Medium

; Mentor
: Dan Mills or other CC tech staff member

=== Project: Media Widget ===

: The CC media widget will allow content from a user's CC homepage (a product we're working on) to be embedded into other sites, like Tumblr, WordPress, etc. Our main interest is in specialized widgets that excel at displaying particular media types, not a generic "file list" widget. For example, a great image widget probably looks and feels different from an academic paper widget.

; Expected Results
: A widget that is able to take CC licensed files and their metadata and visualize it in neat ways that users find compelling. The widget must also include the licensing metadata/attribution information: which license it's released under, the author's name/handle, and so on. Clever ways of displaying this information in a way that is accessible but not annoying will be a plus.

; Knowledge Prerequisite
: JavaScript, HTML/CSS, node.js

; Skill Level
: Low

; Mentor
: Dan Mills or other CC tech staff member
Find serves progect media java script HTML /CSS node js Licence and code
Nurhusien Hasen

Summer of Code 2013

2013-10-10T20:40:26Z

Nurhusien Hasen: /* Project: Homepage Themes */