CSC 379:Week 2, Group 1

Creative Commons

Overview

Provisions of Creative Commons License

Based upon copyright protections, the various forms of the creative commons licenses allow the creator of a work to declare "some rights reserved" instead of the usual "all rights reserved" associated with plain copyright. This allows the creator of the original work to grant certain permissions to those who wish to use the original work without the prospective user having to explicitly ask for permission. ((after text, link to creative commons website or some sub-site?))

Comparison to other common licenses

((table: benefits (to 'user' / to 'creator'), disadvantages (to 'user' / to 'creator'), why to use it?, ethical considerations))

License	Advantages	Disadvantages	Ethical Considerations
Creative Commons	Creator of work can grant specific permissions for re-use of work Rights and conditions of others to use work are more clearly laid out Based on copyright	Must be careful to choose appropriate license to retain the desired amount of control over the work Must specifically designate work as licensed under Creative Commons Users of Creative Commons-licensed works must be careful when combining works with different licenses	There is a disclaimer of warranty that the individual granting the license has the right to do so Certain provisions of the license change between countries
Copyright	Automatically granted to created works, even without notice Reserves all rights for the creator	Can cause confusion, since it applies without notice of copyright Those wishing to reuse copyrighted works must seek explicit permission	Easy to violate copyright unintentionally, since notification of copyright is not required
GPL	Requires any modified and released versions to have source code available, and to stay under the GPL Maintains free software environment Based on copyright	Incompatible with closed-source (commercial) development Once something is under the GPL, it essentially must stay under GPL	"Locked-in" to GPL Forces ideology behind GPL on users of GPL'd content
Lesser GPL (LGPL)	Allows non-GPL software to link with LGPL'd libraries Less restrictive than GPL Based on copyright	Largely discouraged by GPL proponents	Allows free software to be used in proprietary projects
BSD-style Licenses	Non-copyleft - modified versions aren't required to be free, more flexible Allows modified versions to be released under alternate licenses Based on copyright	Modified versions can become incorporated into proprietary projects Original BSD license had an annoying "advertisement" clause	Free code can be made proprietary
Public Domain	Work is released from copyright Work can be used by anyone else without restriction	Any rights by the creator are forfeited	Creator retains no rights to work

Discussion Questions

Adoption of license

The Question

Should groups like media outlets who desire their content to be shared adopt licenses like creative commons to clarify and guarantee the protections they want to extend to the public?

Yes the groups should adopt it blah blah blah.

Some more stuff.

Blah blah blah.

Links (if applicable)

• google

Ethical considerations / Obstacles to adoption

The Question

What ethical advantages and disadvantages are there for adopting Creative Commons licenses? What obstacles exist towards the adoption of Creative Commons licenses within the business community?

Ethical considerations of international usage

The Question

Copyright law differs between countries. Creative Commons has licenses that can be adapted to be compatible with the laws of many nations. What ethical considerations are there to a system of international copyright laws and/or agreements? Are licenses like Creative Commons viable alternatives to international agreements?