Difference between revisions of "Modifying the CC licenses"

From Creative Commons
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "===The beauty of standardization=== One of the fundamental design principles of all CC licenses is that of granting permission in advance to the public, without the need for u...")
 
(→‎License Modification Policy)
 
(18 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
===The beauty of standardization===
+
CC recognizes that we cannot control or prohibit separate agreements or understandings that involve or affect our standard licenses. After all, CC is not a party to the licenses – they are agreements between licensors and licensees. However, we have long insisted that CC trademarks and branding not be used in connection with separate agreements, understandings, and interpretations that may cause confusion for the public, or create any ambiguity in or inconsistency with the standard terms and conditions offered by a Creative Commons license.
−
One of the fundamental design principles of all CC licenses is that of granting permission in advance to the public, without the need for users of the work to seek permission first.  The key benefit of this design is that it provides assurance to those seeking to reuse content of their ability and right to do so, under standard terms and conditions, thereby facilitating reuse and reducing transaction costs.
 
  
−
CC licenses achieve this result through terms and conditions that are standard, meaning the same terms and conditions apply for all content licensed under a particular CC license. The result is reduced friction for creators who want to allow certain reuses without negotiating and granting permission after permission, and the people who wish to creatively reuse those works.
+
CC’s policy prohibiting use of our trademarks and branding in connection with such arrangements has been a long-standing part of our [http://creativecommons.org/policies Trademark Policy].  This page provides additional details on the scope of the policy, as well as guidelines for proper and improper use of our trademarks and branding in connection with any such separate agreements, understandings, or modifications.  Note that this policy and guidelines also apply to CC’s other legal tools, such as the CC0 Public Domain Dedication.
  
−
===Friction undermines the goals of public licensing===
+
===License Modification Policy===
−
Friction takes many forms, and can broadly be described as anything that increases the time, effort, resources and risk associated with licensing or reusing content.  Perhaps the two most significant and common sources of friction are:
 
  
−
*  having to contact the licensor in advance for permission (and correspondingly, having to respond to and negotiate those requests)
 
−
*  having to locate, understand, and accommodate interpretations or modifications of standardized license terms that apply to a particular reuse
 
  
 +
'''1.  If you make a change to the text of any CC license, you may no longer refer to it as a Creative Commons or CC license, and you must not use any CC trademarks (including the Creative Commons name) or branding in connection with the license.''' (For the avoidance of doubt, this includes  translations of CC licenses that have not been made and approved by CC in accordance with the [https://wiki.creativecommons.org/Legal_Code_Translation_Policy Legal Code Translation Policy].)
  
−
Friction is most commonly caused by licensors' attempts to modify or supplement the CC licenses (whether directly in the text of the licenses or through terms of use or similar) with explanations, interpretations or additional agreements that narrow or contradict existing terms and conditions. These main sources of friction undermine the central goal that CC was designed to serve: to provide the public with a standardized, reliable mechanism for communicating usage rights for works and facilitate remixing of compatibly-licensed works.
+
'''2.  If you place any restriction on use of a CC-licensed work that has the effect of limiting or further conditioning the permissions granted to the public under the standard CC license, you must not use any CC trademarks (including the Creative Commons name) or branding in connection with the license or in any way that suggests the work is available under a CC license. These restrictions often appear in terms of use on websites where CC-licensed content is hosted, or as part of terms for downloading CC-licensed content.'''
  
−
=== CC policy===
+
::*Example of impermissible extra restriction: You may not use our trademarks or branding if your terms of use provide an interpretation of a license term that contradicts the plain meaning of the standard CC terms, such as stating an interpretation of NonCommercial that hinges on the type of reuser (the definition of NonCommercial does not differentiate on this basis) as opposed to the purpose for which the work is used.
−
CC recognizes that we cannot, even if we wanted to, control or prohibit separate agreements or understandings outside of CC's standard license terms, whether offered by creators or users of content.  After all, CC is not a party to the license – it is an agreement between the licensor and licensee. We can, however, clarify in our licenses how those separate agreements, understandings and interpretations interact with our licenses to minimize friction.  Separate or supplemental agreements, understandings and interpretations often appear in terms of use on websites where CC-licensed content is hosted, or as part of terms for downloading CC-licensed content.  
+
 
 +
:::::It is permissible, however, to have trademark guidelines that govern how your logo or other trademark may be used in connection with the CC-licensed work. It is also permissible to impose website terms of use that restrict access to the website by minors pursuant to applicable law.  In neither case is use of CC’s trademarks or logo problematic so long as our [http://creativecommons.org/policies Trademark Policy] is followed.
  
−
First, we recognize that providing clarification can make sense intuitively, and is arguably useful in a few limited circumstances, but only when doing so:
+
::*Example of impermissible extra restriction: You may not use our trademarks or branding if your terms of use prohibit sharing of the CC-licensed work in certain formats.
  
−
* is consistent with, and not contrary to, the terms of the license, and does '''not''' alter the usage permissions or alter the conditions imposed
+
:::::It is permissible, however, to distribute your own CC-licensed work in a format that is not easily shared (though CC strongly discourages this) or to put your CC-licensed content behind a paywall.
−
* does '''not''' impose any requirement on a particular class of users that they contact the licensor in advance for permissions the license has already granted
 
−
* does '''not''' otherwise increase transaction costs for any potential licensee
 
  
 +
::*Example of impermissible extra restriction: You may not use our trademarks or branding if your website terms of use impose attribution requirements that are more elaborate than those found in the standard CC license.
  
−
But other than when clarifications are implemented consistent with the foregoing, CC discourages such practices and policies of licensors.  Doing so undermines the spirit of the CC licenses, the communities they support, and the legitimate, common goals of those in any particular domain where sharing is vital to the goals of that community.  Thus, CC has established three policies that support these objectives:
+
:::::It is permissible, however, to impose terms of use that have the effect of increasing (or removing the conditions on) the permissions granted to the public under the standard terms, such as waiving the attribution condition or allowing translations of an ND-licensed work (see CC+)
  
−
#  We do not allow modified versions of our licenses to be called "Creative Commons" or "CC" licenses.
+
NOTE: While providing "clarification" of license terms can make sense intuitively, it often runs the risk of crossing the line to become a modification of how the licenses work. CC generally discourages this practice, other than creation of educational materials about how the licenses work. If you decide to try to clarify a license term on your website or elsewhere, please respect the guidelines above.
−
# We only allow our trademark and brand to be used in association with our CC licenses and our organization’s activities.
 
−
#All CC licenses include a commercially standard clause making clear that there are “no other understandings, agreements or representations” not specified within the licenses themselves relating to use of the work. Note that in version 4.0 of CC's licenses, the licenses will clarify that where such separate agreements or understandings are found to exist, they are separate and independent of the CC licenses themselves, and if they conflict then the terms of the CC licenses prevail over the conflicting terms.  
 
  
 +
==Changelog==
 +
*17 April 2015: added clarification that policy covers license translations that are not made according to official policy
  
−
The above are designed to preserve the underlying principles and benefits of public licensing, both for licensors and licensees, by reducing conflicts and confusion that may ensue.
+
=== Rationale for the CC policy: ‘‘the beauty of standardization’’ ===
−
 
+
The above guidelines are designed to preserve the underlying principles and benefits of public licensing for licensors and licensees, by reducing conflicts and confusion that may ensue. One of the fundamental design principles of CC licensing is granting permission to the public in advance, thereby reducing transaction costs and facilitating reuse. CC licenses achieve this result through terms and conditions that are ‘’standard,’’ meaning the same terms and conditions apply for all content licensed under a particular CC license. The result is reduced friction for creators who want to allow certain reuses without negotiating and granting lots of individual permissions, and for reusers who want to make use the licensed content with minimal hassle.
−
===A word about Open Educational Resources (OER)===
 
−
It is worth mentioning how particularly important the above topic is to [http://creativecommons.org/education OER]. The feature of CC’s licenses – that they grant certain permissions in advance – is core to the success of OER and sharing.  We actively discourage practices that interfere with or undermine that feature, particularly when those policies expressly require that users or some subset of users must ask permission first.
 

Latest revision as of 22:52, 17 April 2015

CC recognizes that we cannot control or prohibit separate agreements or understandings that involve or affect our standard licenses. After all, CC is not a party to the licenses – they are agreements between licensors and licensees. However, we have long insisted that CC trademarks and branding not be used in connection with separate agreements, understandings, and interpretations that may cause confusion for the public, or create any ambiguity in or inconsistency with the standard terms and conditions offered by a Creative Commons license.

CC’s policy prohibiting use of our trademarks and branding in connection with such arrangements has been a long-standing part of our Trademark Policy. This page provides additional details on the scope of the policy, as well as guidelines for proper and improper use of our trademarks and branding in connection with any such separate agreements, understandings, or modifications. Note that this policy and guidelines also apply to CC’s other legal tools, such as the CC0 Public Domain Dedication.

License Modification Policy

1. If you make a change to the text of any CC license, you may no longer refer to it as a Creative Commons or CC license, and you must not use any CC trademarks (including the Creative Commons name) or branding in connection with the license. (For the avoidance of doubt, this includes translations of CC licenses that have not been made and approved by CC in accordance with the Legal Code Translation Policy.)

2. If you place any restriction on use of a CC-licensed work that has the effect of limiting or further conditioning the permissions granted to the public under the standard CC license, you must not use any CC trademarks (including the Creative Commons name) or branding in connection with the license or in any way that suggests the work is available under a CC license. These restrictions often appear in terms of use on websites where CC-licensed content is hosted, or as part of terms for downloading CC-licensed content.

  • Example of impermissible extra restriction: You may not use our trademarks or branding if your terms of use provide an interpretation of a license term that contradicts the plain meaning of the standard CC terms, such as stating an interpretation of NonCommercial that hinges on the type of reuser (the definition of NonCommercial does not differentiate on this basis) as opposed to the purpose for which the work is used.
It is permissible, however, to have trademark guidelines that govern how your logo or other trademark may be used in connection with the CC-licensed work. It is also permissible to impose website terms of use that restrict access to the website by minors pursuant to applicable law. In neither case is use of CC’s trademarks or logo problematic so long as our Trademark Policy is followed.
  • Example of impermissible extra restriction: You may not use our trademarks or branding if your terms of use prohibit sharing of the CC-licensed work in certain formats.
It is permissible, however, to distribute your own CC-licensed work in a format that is not easily shared (though CC strongly discourages this) or to put your CC-licensed content behind a paywall.
  • Example of impermissible extra restriction: You may not use our trademarks or branding if your website terms of use impose attribution requirements that are more elaborate than those found in the standard CC license.
It is permissible, however, to impose terms of use that have the effect of increasing (or removing the conditions on) the permissions granted to the public under the standard terms, such as waiving the attribution condition or allowing translations of an ND-licensed work (see CC+)

NOTE: While providing "clarification" of license terms can make sense intuitively, it often runs the risk of crossing the line to become a modification of how the licenses work. CC generally discourages this practice, other than creation of educational materials about how the licenses work. If you decide to try to clarify a license term on your website or elsewhere, please respect the guidelines above.

Changelog

  • 17 April 2015: added clarification that policy covers license translations that are not made according to official policy

Rationale for the CC policy: ‘‘the beauty of standardization’’

The above guidelines are designed to preserve the underlying principles and benefits of public licensing for licensors and licensees, by reducing conflicts and confusion that may ensue. One of the fundamental design principles of CC licensing is granting permission to the public in advance, thereby reducing transaction costs and facilitating reuse. CC licenses achieve this result through terms and conditions that are ‘’standard,’’ meaning the same terms and conditions apply for all content licensed under a particular CC license. The result is reduced friction for creators who want to allow certain reuses without negotiating and granting lots of individual permissions, and for reusers who want to make use the licensed content with minimal hassle.

Retrieved from "https://wiki.creativecommons.org/index.php?title=Modifying_the_CC_licenses&oldid=113854"