Despite our best efforts, spelling errors and other errata are sometimes included in the published legal code for licenses. Creative Commons publishes SHA1 checksums for legal code, which allows people who receive a copy of the license to easily verify this it has not been tampered with. Therefore Creative Commons does not amend legal code once published.
Creative Commons is planning an errata service which will allow us to record and report the typographical errata for a license without modifying the document itself. This service is currently under development, and will launch at some time in the future (probably 2010). Until that time, this wiki page collects known errata for license legal code. If you discover a spelling error on a license, please record it here. The information on this page will be integrated in the errata service at launch time.
- 1 Recurring bugs
- 2 Individual license errata
- 2.1 by 3.0 us
- 2.2 by-sa 3.0 us
- 2.3 by 2.0 de
- 2.4 by-nd and by-nc-nd 3.0 unported
- 2.5 by-sa 3.0 unported
- 2.6 every 3.0 license other than by-nc-sa
- 2.7 cc byncsa, cc bysa, cc by
- 2.8 cc byncsa vs. cc bysa
- 2.9 cc byncsa vs. other licenses
- 2.10 cc bysa, cc bync vs. other licenses
- 2.11 cc byncsa vs. cc bync
- 2.12 by-sa 2.0 it
- 2.13 devnations 2.0 (retired)
- 2.14 by, by-nc, by-nc-nd, by-nd, by-sa 2.0 fr
by-sa with by-nc-sa as example compatible port
Found in (at least, pending further review). See section 4(b) or 4(β) in the Greece license:
- by-sa 3.0 gr
- by-sa 3.0 ph
- by-sa 2.5 ca (en and fr)
- by-sa 2.0 at
- by-sa 2.0 ca (en and fr)
- by-sa 2.0 de
- by-sa 2.0 fr
Header color-coding not correct
The headers of the legalcode are color-coded to indicate the relative openness of the licenses. A green header means more open, and this is only applied to the BY and BY-SA licenses. The BY-NC, BY-NC-ND, BY-NC-SA and BY-ND legalcode should have a yellow header.
Has a green header, but should be yellow:
- by-nc, by-nc-nd, by-nc-sa, by-nd 3.0 gt (Guatemala)
Has a yellow header, but should be green:
- by, by-sa 3.0 gr (Greece)
"Creative Commons Compatible License" Clause
In BY SA licenses, the "Creative Commons Compatible License" clause in Section 1 should make reference to "Unported" license, as in the example from BY SA 3.0 US: "(ii) explicitly permits the relicensing of derivatives of works made available under that license under this License or either a Creative Commons unported license or a Creative Commons jurisdiction license with the same License Elements as this License." (italics added)
Licenses without reference to Unported:
- by-sa 3.0 ph
- by-sa 3.0 nz
- by-sa 3.0 no
- by-sa 3.0 ro
Individual license errata
by 3.0 us
Section (3) b. includes two semicolons (;). "...or a modification could indicate "The original work has been modified.";;"
by-sa 3.0 us
Section 4(a) (about mid paragraph), the sentence "You may not impose any technological measures on the Work that restrict the ability of a recipient of the Work from You to exercise of the rights granted to that recipient under the terms of the License." The bolded word "of" should not be there.
by 2.0 de
(1) Lizenzvertrag: < UNTER DER VORAUSSETZUNGEIN, DASS --- > UNTER DER VORAUSSETZUNG EIN, DASS (2) Definitionen: < f. f. Unter dem „Schutzgegenstand"wird < verstanden --- > f. Unter dem „Schutzgegenstand" wird > verstanden. (3) Gewährleistung: < vereinbart,, --- > vereinbart, (4) Schlussbestimmungen: < a. a. Jedes Mal --- > a. Jedes Mal (5) < HAT CREATIVE COMMONS ALL RECHTE [...] < LIZENSGEBERS [...] < KENIE VERTRAGSPARTEI [...] < ÜBREEINSTIMMUNG --- > HAT CREATIVE COMMONS ALLE RECHTE [...] > LIZENZGEBERS [...] > DARF KEINE VERTRAGSPARTEI [...] > ÜBEREINSTIMMUNG
by-nd and by-nc-nd 3.0 unported
- The last paragraph of section 3 makes reference to a section 8(f), which doesn't actually exist. Instead, it should refer to section 8(e).
by-sa 3.0 unported
- 1(b) cites 1(f), should cite 1(h)
- 1(b) says Adaption is defined above, not below as the text states.
- 4(c) has a spelling error: "(iv) , consistent with Ssection 3(b)"
every 3.0 license other than by-nc-sa
is "MERCHANTIBILITY" - should be "MERCHANTABILITY"
inconsitency: BYNCSA states:"THIS EXCLUSION MAY NOT", every other license states "SUCH EXCLUSION MAY NOT"
cc byncsa, cc bysa, cc by
4.c. compensation in *con-nection* with the exchange of copyrighted works.
should be connection, without hyphen?
cc byncsa vs. cc bysa
1. 4(b): (i) the terms of this License;
4(b): the terms of: (i) this License;
2. granted by Licensor are hereby reserved, *including but not limited to the rights described in Section 4(e)*.
granted by Licensor are hereby reserved. [part missing]
cc byncsa vs. other licenses
5. UNLESS OTHERWISE MUTUALLY AGREED TO BY THE PARTIES IN WRITING AND TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, LICENSOR
5. UNLESS OTHERWISE MUTUALLY AGREED TO BY THE PARTIES IN WRITING, LICENSOR
cc bysa, cc bync vs. other licenses
For the avoidance of doubt, this trademark restriction does not form part of *this* License.
For the avoidance of doubt, this trademark restriction does not form part of *the* License.
cc byncsa vs. cc bync
3.d.: ... including but not limited to the rights *described* in Section 4(e).
3.d.: ...including but not limited to the rights *set forth* in Section 4(d).
by-sa 2.0 it
- 4(b) is a repeat of 4(a)
- corrected in http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/it/legalcode
devnations 2.0 (retired)
- economy is misspelled
by, by-nc, by-nc-nd, by-nd, by-sa 2.0 fr
All of these license have a section 5(a)(i) that references a non-existent section 4(e). The by-nc-sa license is not affected and this is probably a by-product of the fact that the by-nc-sa license is usually the template for all the others.