Difference between revisions of "Version 3.01"
m (→what about sui generis rights?) |
(→See also) |
||
Line 72: | Line 72: | ||
* but unported used in such jurisdictions | * but unported used in such jurisdictions | ||
− | + | = See also = | |
+ | == Background to 3.01 == | ||
+ | |||
+ | Discussions leading to 3.01: | ||
+ | * http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/commons-l/2007-July/thread.html#2117 | ||
+ | * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2007-08-13/CC_3.0 | ||
+ | * http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2007-June/thread.html#30607 | ||
+ | * http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Licensing#Creative_Commons_3.0_Licenses_.28again.29 | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | == Previous versions == | ||
* [[Version 3]] | * [[Version 3]] | ||
* [[License versions]] | * [[License versions]] |
Revision as of 01:49, 14 October 2007
Work on version 3.01 announced 2007-10-11 at http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/7718
Public discussion taking place on http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
Contents
Suggestion tracking
Relative to draft language posted at http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/7718
Section 4(f)
and/if
"and You Reproduce" should be "if You Reproduce"
See http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2007-October/006195.html
national/local
For consistency "national law" should be "local law"
CC internal suggestion
otherwise permitted
By removing "or as may be otherwise permitted by applicable law" from the first sentence, the clause could be read to be purporting to remove any defences applicable to the infringement of the moral right of integrity (reasonableness).
Suggest adding the words "except as permissible under the local law." to the end of the first sentence.
See http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2007-October/006196.html
Other sections
No suggestions yet. Proposed scope of change is only Section 4(f).
Concerns tracking
Concerns raised without any suggestion to address.
Section 4(f)
warranty of waiver
In countries where "any exercise of the right granted in Section 3(b) [...] could violate the moral right of integrity of the Original Author", if the Licensor is not the original author, the value of the licence is almost nil (only the reproduction right is effectively licensed). I would be concerned about (a) the lack of either a warranty that moral rights have been cleared or a notice that they haven't, and (b) the potential liability of the Licensor for misleading conduct.
See http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2007-October/006196.html
Other sections
what about sui generis rights?
Should 3.01 also address database rights which are addressed in relevant jurisdiction licenses?
See http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2007-October/006198.html
Responses:
http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2007-October/006199.html
- only appropriate for jurisdiction licenses in jurisdictions with db rights
http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2007-October/006200.html
- but unported used in such jurisdictions
See also
Background to 3.01
Discussions leading to 3.01:
- http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/commons-l/2007-July/thread.html#2117
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2007-08-13/CC_3.0
- http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2007-June/thread.html#30607
- http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Licensing#Creative_Commons_3.0_Licenses_.28again.29