Difference between revisions of "4.0/Draft 3/Regional calls"

From Creative Commons
Jump to: navigation, search
(further outline)
(include some HS prompts)
Line 55: Line 55:
 
Section 2.
 
Section 2.
  
 +
''This draft utilizes slightly different terminology and defined terms, but the categories of rights being licensed remain unchanged: copyright, neighboring rights and SGDRs. As in draft 2, it is written to be intentionally open-ended to account for new copyright-like rights enacted in the future and to avoid accidentally failing to include rights that should be included. We also do not want to cover too much, so we have explicitly excluded patent, trademark, moral rights and publicity/privacy rights.  The change in draft 3 is that license grant no longer states an exhaustive list of things the licensee is allowed to do (e.g., reproduce).  The new approach is to grant a license to exercise Copyright and Similar Rights, then mention an open-ended list of things authorized. This is designed to accommodate jurisdictions where copyright law does not grant a finite set of exclusive rights to copyright holders.''
 +
 +
'''''Questions:  Are there any types of rights or rights under copyright we are  unintentionally capturing that we should not? Anything this fails to capture?'''''
 
===Africa===
 
===Africa===
 
===Arab World===
 
===Arab World===
Line 62: Line 65:
 
==Treatment of licensor's publicity and privacy rights==
 
==Treatment of licensor's publicity and privacy rights==
 
Section 2(b)(1).
 
Section 2(b)(1).
===Prompt===
+
 
 +
''This draft includes a new approach to publicity/privacy rights. Those rights are now treated like moral rights -- they are waived or not asserted to the extent necessary for the  licensee to exercise the licensed rights. As an example, if I license a photo of myself, this provision would prevent me from using my own publicity rights to prevent the licensee from exercising their rights under the CC license.''
 +
 
 +
'''''Do you like this approach to publicity and privacy rights? Is there anything we should change in the provision?'''''
 
===Africa===
 
===Africa===
 
===Arab World===
 
===Arab World===
Line 70: Line 76:
 
==Attribution and marking==
 
==Attribution and marking==
 
Section 3(a)(1)(D).
 
Section 3(a)(1)(D).
===Prompt===
+
 
 +
''In draft 3, licensees must indicate if they have modified a work, and if so include link to the original. [http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2013-February/007333.html Detailed prompt and description] from license list.''
 +
 
 +
''This is now the only time a link is required for attribution (though we will encourage it elsewhere). [http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2013-February/007338.html Detailed prompt and description] from license list.''
 +
 
 +
'''''Questions: is this enough to balance the licensors' and licensees' concerns? If not, what would be a better option?'''''
 
===Africa===
 
===Africa===
 
===Arab World===
 
===Arab World===
Line 77: Line 88:
 
===Latin America===
 
===Latin America===
 
==Treatment of sui generis database rights==
 
==Treatment of sui generis database rights==
 +
''Including SGDRs in the license will only have an effect in jurisdictions where those rights are enacted. We tried to emphasize this by including qualifying language before every provision about SGDRs -  “where the Licensor has SGDRs that apply to you,”  and “Where licensors have SGDRs and those rights apply to the licensee”.''
 +
 +
'*''The  license grants permission to do things that implicate SGDRs.  The license grant includes using and sharing a substantial portion of  database contents as an example so that licensees have no doubt that permission is granted. ''
 +
*''In the NC licenses, licensees may only do things that implicate SGDRs for NC purposes. (Note that means licensees cannot mine for commercial purposes unless an exception or limitation applies.)''
 +
*''In the ND licenses, can do use the database in a way that implicates SGDRs, except you cannot reuse a substantial  portion of contents in a separate database in which you have SGDRs.''
 +
*''Licensees must always attribute when they reuse a substantial portion of contents publicly.''
 +
*''In the SA licenses, licensees must ShareAlike when they reuse a substantial portion of the contents in a different database in which they themselves have SGDRs and which they share publicly. In those cases, SA only applies to the database structure and not the contents.''
 +
 +
'''''Questions: Have we done an adequate job of ensuring that licensees will not feel they have to comply with the license (e.g., attribute) when SGDRs do not apply to them? Are there any other remaining concerns about including SGDRs within the license scope?'''''
 
Appears throughout the license.
 
Appears throughout the license.
===Prompt===
 
 
===Africa===
 
===Africa===
 
===Arab World===
 
===Arab World===

Revision as of 17:50, 2 April 2013

In March/April 2013, Creative Commons engaged with its affiliates to discuss the third and final discussion draft of the version 4.0 licenses.

These conversations gave CC the opportunity to receive feedback n the remaining open license issues 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):

  1. Using this public license
  2. License interpretation
  3. License grant: scope
  4. Treatment of licensor's publicity and privacy rights
  5. Attribution and marking
  6. Treatment of sui generis database rights
  7. NonCommercial
  8. Licensing of adaptations under BY and BY-NC
  9. Creative Commons Compatible License: definition, inclusion in BY-NC-SA
  10. TPMs and permission to circumvent
  11. Termination and cure period
  12. Other topics

Participating jurisdictions:

  • Africa:
  • Arab World: TBA
  • Asia Pacific:
  • Europe:
  • Latin America:

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.

Using this public license

Top of the license, before legal code begins.

This new section provides important reminders and information for licensors and licensees. We were inspired to create this new section as a result of an earlier proposal to reintroduce representations and warranties on the part of the licensor. We have decided not to pursue the warranty for some important reasons. Notwithstanding, we do want to encourage responsible licensor behavior and understandings, and to remind licensees of the limits of the license. For licensors, we want them to clear rights and to clearly mark third party content included with the licensed work. We also want to remind them that the license is irrevocable. To be clear, this new section is not part of the license and is not intended to impose binding obligations on licensors.

Questions: Is this new section useful? Are there other pieces of key information that licensors or licensees ought be reminded about before licensing or using the licensed material?

License interpretation

Section 7(a).

'This new interpretation provision is designed to provide some predicatability for licensors and licensees about how the license operates. Clarifying within the license has benefits over remaining silent in our judgment. It adds predictability and in rare instances where courts get involved it reminds them of the general rule of interpretation while at the same time giving flexibility to determine that another rules applies given the particular circumstances of the dispute. This rule – interpretation of the rights granted is in accordance with the law in effect where the work is used– is the general rule that applies. It avoids forum shopping and supports other objectives. Note that this clause is only intended to govern a determination as to infringement. It leaves to the relevant authority the ability to conclude which law applies to other matters, such as whether a valid contract has been formed, disclaimers and warranties, and similar.

See the discussion prompt [LINK] and wiki page for details.

Questions: Is including this reference help with predictability, or would it be better to remain silent? Is the general rule drafted adequately?

Africa

Arab World

Asia-Pacific

Europe

Latin America

License grant: scope

Section 2.

This draft utilizes slightly different terminology and defined terms, but the categories of rights being licensed remain unchanged: copyright, neighboring rights and SGDRs. As in draft 2, it is written to be intentionally open-ended to account for new copyright-like rights enacted in the future and to avoid accidentally failing to include rights that should be included. We also do not want to cover too much, so we have explicitly excluded patent, trademark, moral rights and publicity/privacy rights. The change in draft 3 is that license grant no longer states an exhaustive list of things the licensee is allowed to do (e.g., reproduce). The new approach is to grant a license to exercise Copyright and Similar Rights, then mention an open-ended list of things authorized. This is designed to accommodate jurisdictions where copyright law does not grant a finite set of exclusive rights to copyright holders.

Questions: Are there any types of rights or rights under copyright we are unintentionally capturing that we should not? Anything this fails to capture?

Africa

Arab World

Asia-Pacific

Europe

Latin America

Treatment of licensor's publicity and privacy rights

Section 2(b)(1).

This draft includes a new approach to publicity/privacy rights. Those rights are now treated like moral rights -- they are waived or not asserted to the extent necessary for the licensee to exercise the licensed rights. As an example, if I license a photo of myself, this provision would prevent me from using my own publicity rights to prevent the licensee from exercising their rights under the CC license.

Do you like this approach to publicity and privacy rights? Is there anything we should change in the provision?

Africa

Arab World

Asia-Pacific

Europe

Latin America

Attribution and marking

Section 3(a)(1)(D).

In draft 3, licensees must indicate if they have modified a work, and if so include link to the original. Detailed prompt and description from license list.

This is now the only time a link is required for attribution (though we will encourage it elsewhere). Detailed prompt and description from license list.

Questions: is this enough to balance the licensors' and licensees' concerns? If not, what would be a better option?

Africa

Arab World

Asia-Pacific

Europe

Latin America

Treatment of sui generis database rights

Including SGDRs in the license will only have an effect in jurisdictions where those rights are enacted. We tried to emphasize this by including qualifying language before every provision about SGDRs - “where the Licensor has SGDRs that apply to you,” and “Where licensors have SGDRs and those rights apply to the licensee”.

'*The license grants permission to do things that implicate SGDRs. The license grant includes using and sharing a substantial portion of database contents as an example so that licensees have no doubt that permission is granted.

  • In the NC licenses, licensees may only do things that implicate SGDRs for NC purposes. (Note that means licensees cannot mine for commercial purposes unless an exception or limitation applies.)
  • In the ND licenses, can do use the database in a way that implicates SGDRs, except you cannot reuse a substantial portion of contents in a separate database in which you have SGDRs.
  • Licensees must always attribute when they reuse a substantial portion of contents publicly.
  • In the SA licenses, licensees must ShareAlike when they reuse a substantial portion of the contents in a different database in which they themselves have SGDRs and which they share publicly. In those cases, SA only applies to the database structure and not the contents.

Questions: Have we done an adequate job of ensuring that licensees will not feel they have to comply with the license (e.g., attribute) when SGDRs do not apply to them? Are there any other remaining concerns about including SGDRs within the license scope? Appears throughout the license.

Africa

Arab World

Asia-Pacific

Europe

Latin America

NonCommercial

No change to the name of NC: we couldn't reach consensus on this, so we're sticking with the status quo, but may include "Commercial Rights Reserved" in other messaging.

We also removed the word "private" from "private monetary advantage" in the definition; this is not intended to be a substantive change.

Africa

Arab World

Asia-Pacific

Europe

Latin America

Licensing of adaptations under BY and BY-NC

Section 3(d).

Africa

Arab World

Asia-Pacific

Europe

Latin America

Creative Commons Compatible License: definition, inclusion in BY-NC-SA

Section 1(d).

Africa

Arab World

Asia-Pacific

Europe

Latin America

TPMs and permission to circumvent

Section 2(a)(3).

Africa

Arab World

Asia-Pacific

Europe

Latin America

Termination and cure period

Section 5.

Africa

Arab World

Asia-Pacific

Europe

Latin America

Other topics

Africa

Arab World

Asia-Pacific

Europe

Latin America