4.0/ShareAlike - Revision history

CCID-diane peters at 19:16, 11 September 2013

2013-09-11T19:16:54Z

CCID-shinchpearson: /* Treatment in drafts */

2013-09-10T23:14:40Z

‎Treatment in drafts

CCID-shinchpearson at 22:58, 9 September 2013

2013-09-09T22:58:54Z

CCID-shinchpearson at 21:35, 9 September 2013

2013-09-09T21:35:46Z

Kat Walsh: headers

2013-05-20T19:22:31Z

headers

Kat Walsh: headers

2013-05-20T19:21:40Z

headers

Kat Walsh: fmt

2013-05-20T19:20:47Z

fmt

Kat Walsh: /* Proposals relating to SA scope in 4.0 */ +d3 proposals

2013-02-14T17:45:22Z

‎Proposals relating to SA scope in 4.0: +d3 proposals

Kat Walsh: +draft 3

2013-02-14T03:58:43Z

+draft 3

Aurelia Schultz at 17:50, 1 August 2012

2012-08-01T17:50:52Z

@@ Line 60: / Line 60: @@
 {{Infobox|
 ===Draft 4===
-In this draft, we have added a provision in Section 2(a)(5) of the ShareAlike licenses that enables downstream licensees to refer only to the “Adapter’s License” (formerly the “Adaptation License” in prior drafts) when using Adapted Material that combines the work of multiple authors. In the ShareAlike context, the Adapter’s License is typically the same license as the license applied to the original, but it can differ slightly because ShareAlike allows adapters to apply a later version of the license to their rights in Adapted Material. The change in d4 is designed to minimize complexity for reusers so that they only have to refer to a single set of terms and conditions to reuse Adapted Material, rather than parsing the terms and conditions of the original and Adapter’s License to the extent the licenses differ. This change, which we believe comports with common practice under 3.0, will be a major focus of the discussion period surrounding d4.
+In this draft, we have added a provision in Section 2(a)(5) of the ShareAlike licenses that enables downstream licensees to refer only to the “Adapter’s License” (formerly the “Adaptation License” in prior drafts) when using Adapted Material that combines the work of multiple authors. In the ShareAlike context, the Adapter’s License is typically the same license as the license applied to the original, but it can differ slightly because ShareAlike allows adapters to apply a later version of the license to their rights in Adapted Material. The change in d4 is designed to minimize complexity for reusers so that they only have to refer to a single set of terms and conditions to reuse Adapted Material, rather than parsing the terms and conditions of the original and Adapter’s License to the extent the licenses differ. This change, which we believe comports with common practice under 3.0, will be one of the primary provisions on which we seek feedback on d4 but do not believe it should be controversial.
-We also added language clarifying that the ShareAlike section only applies to those that adapt the licensed material, not anyone reusing Adapted Material.}}
+We also added language clarifying that the ShareAlike section only applies to those that adapt the licensed material, not anyone reusing Adapted Material.  This is how Version 3.0 operates; we are simply making that clear.}}
 ==Overview==

@@ Line 60: / Line 60: @@
 {{Infobox|
 ===Draft 4===
-In this draft, we have added a provision in Section 2(a)(5) of the ShareAlike licenses that enables downstream licensees to refer only to the “Adapter’s License” (formerly the “Adaptation License” in prior drafts) when using Adapted Material that combines the work of multiple authors. In the ShareAlike context, the Adapter’s License is typically the same license as the license applied to the original, but it can differ slightly because ShareAlike allows adapters to apply a later version of the license to their rights in Adapted Material. The change in d4 is designed to minimize complexity for reusers so that they only have to refer to a single set of terms and conditions to reuse Adapted Material, rather than parsing the terms and conditions of the original and Adapter’s License to the extent the licenses differ. This change will be a major focus of the discussion period surrounding d4.
+In this draft, we have added a provision in Section 2(a)(5) of the ShareAlike licenses that enables downstream licensees to refer only to the “Adapter’s License” (formerly the “Adaptation License” in prior drafts) when using Adapted Material that combines the work of multiple authors. In the ShareAlike context, the Adapter’s License is typically the same license as the license applied to the original, but it can differ slightly because ShareAlike allows adapters to apply a later version of the license to their rights in Adapted Material. The change in d4 is designed to minimize complexity for reusers so that they only have to refer to a single set of terms and conditions to reuse Adapted Material, rather than parsing the terms and conditions of the original and Adapter’s License to the extent the licenses differ. This change, which we believe comports with common practice under 3.0, will be a major focus of the discussion period surrounding d4.
 We also added language clarifying that the ShareAlike section only applies to those that adapt the licensed material, not anyone reusing Adapted Material.}}

@@ Line 46: / Line 46: @@
 |}
-{{Infobox|
+{| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable"
 ===Draft 3===
 The general scope and treatment of ShareAlike remains unchanged under this draft. However, two proposals for compatibility with ShareAlike licenses in the post-d3 discussion period are detailed at the [[4.0/Compatibility|Compatibility]] page: the inclusion of a compatibility mechanism in BY-NC-SA, and the possibility of one way compatibility.
 The language in 3(b) for sharing adaptations has been clarified about which rights are being licensed when sharing adapted material.}}
 {{Infobox|

@@ Line 51: / Line 51: @@
 The language in 3(b) for sharing adaptations has been clarified about which rights are being licensed when sharing adapted material.}}
 ==Overview==
@@ Line 76: / Line 82: @@
 * '''Treatment in 4.0 d.2:''' Same.
 * '''Treatment in 4.0 d.3:''' Same.
 '''''SA Proposal No. 2:'''''  '''Make work/adaptation/collection definitions easier to read, but strive to not make any effective change.'''
@@ Line 84: / Line 92: @@
 * '''Treatment in 4.0 d.2:''' Same.
 * '''Treatment in 4.0 d.3:''' Same.
 '''''SA Proposal No. 3:'''''  '''Expand scope of adaptation (thus SA) specifically for some class of use of images, analogous to synching added in 2.0.'''
@@ Line 92: / Line 102: @@
 * '''Treatment in 4.0 d.2:''' Same.
 * '''Treatment in 4.0 d.3:''' Same. Note proposals under [[4.0/Compatibility|Compatibility]] for additional information about the possibility of combining CC-BY-SA and GPL or similar works, as well as the general information on [[4.0/Treatment of adaptations|treatment of adaptations]].
@@ Line 103: / Line 114: @@
 * '''Treatment in 4.0 d.2:''' After many discussions with community members, it was decided that this option would not be a good thing. See the pink box above for more information.
 * '''Treatment in 4.0 d.3:''' Same.
 '''''SA Proposal No. 5:'''''  '''Share the wealth clause, requesting that commercial gain (e.g. profits) be shared back to the original creator(s).'''
@@ Line 116: / Line 129: @@
 * '''Treatment in 4.0 d.2:''' Same.
 * '''Treatment in 4.0 d.3:''' Same.
 ''Please add other SA proposals here, and number them sequentially.''

@@ Line 119: / Line 119: @@
 ''Please add other SA proposals here, and number them sequentially.''
-==Source-requiring SA==
+===Source-requiring SA===
 (Note that scope and whether source required are independent of each other.)
@@ Line 125: / Line 125: @@
 Some would like a copyleft for creative works that requires not just sharing adaptations under the same license, but making preferred form for modification available, as the GPL does for software. FDL includes a weaker requirement of providing copies in "transparent" formats. Especially the former may be too far for BY-SA to go (but costs/benefits could be listed to see). Could possibly be addressed via compatibility, see next.
-==Compatibility with other copyleft licenses==
+===Compatibility with other copyleft licenses===
 Directly related to the interoperability goal of 4.0. The following licenses have been discussed at various points, regarding compatibility with BY-SA:

@@ Line 51: / Line 51: @@
 The language in 3(b) for sharing adaptations has been clarified about which rights are being licensed when sharing adapted material.}}
 There are roughly three issues that have been discussed for years that could potentially be addressed. Ideally, addressing one or more of these could increase clarity of relevant CC licenses, and increase range of and differentiation within CC license suite.
-==ShareAlike scope==
+===ShareAlike scope===
 Effectively, this has been treated as identical to potentially tweaking the definition of adaptations vs collections.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{4.0 Issue}}
-{{Infobox |'''Draft 1 Treatment:''' In this draft, we have not changed the ShareAlike condition itself. Instead, we have made changes to the definition of Adaptation that are intended to clarify (but not change) the applicability of SA.  The definition now makes clearer that whether a work is an Adaptation (or not) depends on whether or not its creation requires permission from the licensor under licensor’s right to adapt the work under copyright, with three possible exceptions carried over from 3.0.  Except for those three cases (and each is an exception only if applicable law wouldn’t treat the resulting work in the way the license does), what constitutes an Adaptation may vary slightly depending on applicable law.  This is intentional:  if applicable law provides that modifications infringe a licensor’s right to make adaptations, those modifications result in an Adaptation and requires licensees to ShareAlike in the SA (and in the ND licenses, a violation of the ND term).  While this has been CC’s intention in prior versions, we wanted to make this clearer in 4.0. We look forward to feedback on the way we have revised the definition. We also look forward to a broader discussion about whether additional uses merit special mention in the definition as an Adaptation (or not) for purposes of SA and the ND licenses.  See also the related discussion on the [[4.0/Treatment_of_adaptations|Treatment of Adaptations]].
+{{Infobox |
 We also consolidated all provisions relating to marking and other obligations of licensees who (as permitted by the non ND licenses) create and distribute an Adaptations.   These are aggregated in Section 3.
@@ Line 8: / Line 15: @@
 Note we have also added a bullet point addressing our treatment of each [[4.0/ShareAlike#Proposals_relating_to_SA_scope_in_4.0|ShareAlike]] and [[4.0/ShareAlike#Proposals_relating_to_compatibility_in_4.0|compatibility]] proposal below.}}
 {| class="wikitable" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" width=100%
 |valign="TOP" style="background:#FFDADA;border:5px #FDAFAF;padding:1em;"|
-'''Draft 2 Treatment:''' The ShareAlike condition (and corresponding reliance on “Adaptation” as the trigger) remains unchanged in d2.  A few serious proposals for expanding the scope of this condition have been proposed.  Upon close consideration, we have decided not to pursue those alternatives for reasons explained below.
+===Draft 2===
 One proposal would require all other works included in a collection with an SA work to also use an SA license (or, alternatively, a license no more restrictive). This is problematic for several reasons.
@@ Line 30: / Line 43: @@
 As in d1, the definition and use of the term “Collection” in the license is still removed as unnecessary.  The function of the definition in 3.0 has been to help define the negative space of when and where SA does not apply, and to make clear that licensees have the right to incorporate and reproduce the work in a collection.  Neither of these are necessary as we understand copyright, and indeed have been a source of confusion for many using 3.0 given the unnecessary complexity found in the definition of Collection, among other things.  This does not change (either through expansion or contraction) the trigger for or reach of SA from 3.0, which we reinforce through a new subparagraph (4) in the Section 3(b) ShareAlike condition.  That new subparagraph providesthat for the avoidance of doubt, the SA conditions apply to Adaptations only.'
 |}
-{{Infobox|'''Draft 3 Treatment:'''
+{{Infobox|
 The general scope and treatment of ShareAlike remains unchanged under this draft. However, two proposals for compatibility with ShareAlike licenses in the post-d3 discussion period are detailed at the [[4.0/Compatibility|Compatibility]] page: the inclusion of a compatibility mechanism in BY-NC-SA, and the possibility of one way compatibility.