[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Library subs for works licensed under Creative Commons
- To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Subject: RE: Library subs for works licensed under Creative Commons
- From: Sandy Thatcher <sgt3@psu.edu>
- Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 18:17:38 EDT
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
If only we knew what "noncommercial" means! As Karl Bridges's comment on this thread suggests, the meaning is hardly obvious. Just to give one example, is the use by a researcher who works for Texaco "noncommercial"? Remember that the court in the landmark Texaco photocopying case ruled that although the immediate use was for research, the ultimate purpose for this use was commercial. And the judges in the Michigan Document Services case split 8-5 on whether the copying done by the MDS copyshop was fair use or not, some judges believing that the ultimate use was for educational purposes, hence noncommercial, while others felt that the immediate use was commercial because it brought profits for the copyshop. If judges can't figure this out, far be it for us mere lay people to do so. The CC license relies crucially on this distinction, but it is anything but evident that it has a clear and straightforward meaning. Even Larry Lessig once said (toward the end of "The Future of Ideas") that it is a distinction that cannot be sustained in the Internet age. Sandy Thatcher Penn State University Press >Hi Ann, > >Can you clarify what activities you would like to see specified >in a further agreement? The CC license you mention says that the >copyright owner has given the general public, including the >library, the right to make and distribute copies of the work so >long as this is done for non-commercial purposes and not as part >of a derivative work, and as long as the author's name is not >removed or attribution is otherwise given to the author (or to >whatever other party the licensor may have directed). > >So nothing further need be specified with respect to access or >archiving unless the library or other user wants to make a >commercial use or a derivative work. In those cases a further >agreement concerning those uses would be necessary. But that's >because those uses are outside the CC license. > >Best, >Mike > > >Michael W. Carroll >Visiting Professor of Law >American University, Washington College of Law >Washington, D.C. 20016
- Prev by Date: August issue of the SPARC Open Access Newsletter
- Next by Date: Re: Library subs for works licensed under Creative Commons
- Previous by thread: Re: Library subs for works licensed under Creative Commons
- Next by thread: Re: Library subs for works licensed under Creative Commons
- Index(es):