Useful case. Thanks for sharing it here. Fae https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/LGBT+ http://telegram.me/wmlgbt
On 2 Oct 2017 6:56 a.m., "Federico Leva (Nemo)" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hirtle summary of <https://carrollogos.blogspot. > com/2016/04/us-court-correctly-interprets-creative.html> on Drauglis v. > Kappa Map Group, also covered in > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_Commons_license#Drau > glis_v._Kappa_Map_Group.2C_LLC> > <https://www.technollama.co.uk/us-court-interprets-copyleft- > clause-in-creative-commons-licenses> > > Nemo > > > -------- Messaggio inoltrato -------- > Oggetto: RE: [SCHOLCOMM] By-SA and By-NC-SA > Data: Sun, 1 Oct 2017 22:31:34 +0000 > Mittente: "Peter B. Hirtle" (via scholcomm Mailing List) < > [email protected]> > > Eric, things may be a little clearer than you suspect. Let’s parse your > hypothetical: > > “So imagine you are making a book from two chapters, one SA and the other > SA-NC. The book (a work in its own right because of a creative cover)…” > > That isn’t quite right (though it doesn’t matter for the rest of your > example). The cover itself is likely to have enough creativity to have its > own copyright, but the book as a whole will only have its own copyright if > it is itself an “original work of authorship.” This would mostly involve > some creative selection or organization of the material. Slapping a > copyrighted image on top of two separately copyrighted works is, in my > non-legal opinion, unlikely to be enough to be considered to be a separate > “original work of authorship.” The question would be whether someone could > publish the same two chapters but with a different cover on it, and I think > in most cases they could. > > “…, has to be distriibuted under the more restrictive license (SA-NC) > because it staples together the two chapters.” > > This is incorrect. You haven’t created an adaption of the original > material, so you are not required to use the SA license. Michael Carroll > has a good discussion of this in his blog post on a relatively recent court > case: see https://carrollogos.blogspot.com/2016/04/us-court-correctly- > interprets-creative.html. In this case, a commercial publisher used a SA > photograph on the cover of its street atlas. It slightly cropped the > image, but the court concluded that the change was not enough to create an > adaptation and hence the publisher was not required to distribute its atlas > with an SA license on it. The publisher did comply with the attribution > requirements of the license. > > In your hypothetical, if you decided to abridge the chapter, then you > would be created a derivative version and would have to apply the SA > license to the book. But so long as you follow the other terms in the CC > license, you can put any license you like on the book as a whole (even if > the cover image is the only thing actually being licensed by you). You > could even omit a license on your contribution. Just don’t distribute it > commercially. > > “But it has to do two more things: > > 1. Add separate license statements for each chapter.” > > Yes, I am postulating that you are complying with the attribution and > non-commercial elements of the license, which are not dependent on whether > or not the works are adapted. > > 2. The chapters must be separable (the staples can be easily removed) > > No, the physical format does not matter. Copyright matters are separate > from physical formats. All you need to do is include the original license > and attribution with each chapter. > > Peter Hirtle > > From: [email protected] [mailto:scholcomm-request@list > s.ala.org] On Behalf Of Eric Hellman > Sent: Friday, September 29, 2017 5:24 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [SCHOLCOMM] By-SA and By-NC-SA > > The comments fro Billy Meinke and Peter Hirtle reflect my reality that > there seem to be only gray areas when it comes to copyright. > > The 3.0 license defines "collections" and "adaptions". > > 1. "Collection" means a collection of literary or artistic works, such > as encyclopedias and anthologies, or performances, phonograms or > broadcasts, or other works or subject matter other than works listed in > Section 1(g) below, which, by reason of the selection and arrangement of > their contents, constitute intellectual creations, in which the Work is > included in its entirety in unmodified form along with one or more other > contributions, each constituting separate and independent works in > themselves, which together are assembled into a collective whole. A work > that constitutes a Collection will not be considered an Adaptation (as > defined above) for the purposes of this License. > and in doing so makes explicit how to deal with the SA vs SA-NC. > > So imagine you are making a book from two chapters, one SA and the other > SA-NC. The book (a work in its own right because of a creative cover), has > to be distriibuted under the more restrictive license (SA-NC) because it > staples together the two chapters. But it has to do two more things: > 1. Add separate license statements for each chapter. > 2. The chapters must be separable (the staples can be easily removed) > > I would make the same argument for illustrations in a website or ebook. If > Mahrya Carncross's colleague's guide is more of a collection than mix, then > she might be in the clear. > > https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/legalcode > > The 4.0 license doesn't have this explicit carve-out for collections, and > appears to me to take a harder line against mixed license "arrangement" > works, but at the same time says that 3.0 licensed works can be adapted > into 4.0 licenses, so that's confusing to this non-lawyer. > > https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/legalcode > > Eric Hellman > President, Free Ebook Foundation > Founder, Unglue.it<http://unglue.it> https://unglue.it/ > https://go-to-hellman.blogspot.com/ > twitter: @gluejar > > _______________________________________________ > Commons-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l >
_______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
