Julia's IDEAS

Julia's personal notebook for the m21 project

---

Taking over / mending the World

• Can we metadesign the future of metadesign?
• Can we metadesign where we want to be in 2021?
• Can we metadesign where metadesign will be in 2021?
• How about our name. Will we be a foundation?
• Will we be a foundry?
• Will we be found?
• Who will find us?
• Where will they look?
• If they look, what will they find?
• Do they have the tools to look?
• Do they need the tools so that the are enabled to look?
• Are these the right questions?
• Can we metadesign the questions?

---

Creative Commons stuff:
From: http://www.creativecommons.org.uk/whycc
Share, reuse, and remix — legally.

Creative Commons Licences

Creative Commons provides free tools for authors, artists, and educators to mark their creative work with the freedoms they want it to carry. Our tools change "All Rights Reserved" into "Some Rights Reserved" — as the creator chooses. We are a nonprofit organization. Everything we do — including the software we create — is free.

Local Jurisdictions

Using an England&Wales or Scottish license provides a number of advantages as the licences have been designed to be fully compatible with national contract and copyright law. Some benefits from using a UK licence would be:

• Plain English;
They are far easier to understand than the American legal language of the generic licences.
• Protection of Moral Rights;
Because they follow national contract and copyright law, they offer explicit protection of your moral rights.
• Support;
the support offered by the Scottish and the England & Wales projects, and their helpful joint mailing list;
• Disputes;
in the very unlikely event of any dispute over the terms of the licence, they provide that this should be heard in the courts of your own country;

---

Below is a long list of commonly asked questions about Creative Commons. The answers are a bit further down:

I. Creative Commons in the United Kingdom:

1. What is Creative Commons, and what is Creative Commons in the United Kingdom?

2. Why use a Creative Commons licence?

3. What problem does Creative Commons help solve?

4. So what, exactly, does Creative Commons plan to do?

5. What are the different copyright options available through Creative Commons in the United Kingdom?

6. What are the steps to adopting/using a Creative Commons licence?

7. Whom does Creative Commons serve or represent?

8. Is Creative Commons against copyright?

9. Who funds Creative Commons?

10. Who started Creative Commons?

11. Who leads and speaks for Creative Commons for the whole United Kingdom?

II. The Creative Commons Licences:

1. Why should I turn my work over to the public domain, or make it available under a Creative Commons Custom licence, if copyright provides more legal protection?

2. Does it cost me anything to use your licences?

3. Will works that use Creative Commons licences be in the ‘public domain’?

4. If I choose the non-commercial licence option, can I still make money from my licensed works?

5. I’m not clear what is meant by ‘non-commercial’; what does this form of licence not allow?

6. I am registered with a collecting society. Does this mean that I cannot use Creative Commons to publish my work?

7. What legal standing will Creative Commons licences have in other countries?

8. What are the differences between Creative Commons-England & Wales and Creative Commons-Scotland licences?

9. I am a United Kingdom body or institution. Do I need both?

10. Are some combinations of the custom licence options incompatible?

11. I am using a generic Creative Commons licence; should I switch and use a Scottish or an England & Wales licence?

III. About copyright:

1. What is copyright?

2. Can anything be copyrighted?

3. Do I have to register my copyright in order to get protection?

4. How long does copyright last?

5. What is the ‘public domain’?

6. What rights do copyright holders have?

7. What are exclusive or monopoly rights?

8. What are moral rights?

IV. Creative Archive (CA) and Creative Commons:

1. What if I want to mix Creative Archive and Creative Commons content?

2. What are the differences between Creative Archive and Creative Commons licences?

I. Creative Commons in the United Kingdom:

I.1) What is Creative Commons, and what is Creative Commons in the United Kingdom?

Creative Commons (CC) is a worldwide organisation that offers copyright alternatives (beyond the traditional ‘all rights reserved’) to teachers, scholars, scientists, writers, photographers, filmmakers, musicians, graphic designers, Web hobbyists, artists, and other content developers for use anywhere in the world (further details; website)

There are at present two Creative Commons projects in the United Kingdom; one for each of the two mainland legal jurisdictions, England & Wales, and Scotland. (So far, unfortunately, nobody has set up a project for Northern Ireland). Together they manage this website. Most European jurisdictions have their own CC projects, and there are many others through the world; see the drop-down menu at the top of this page.

I.2) Why use a Creative Commons licence?

There are a variety of reasons for allowing others to reuse, distribute, and should you wish, modify your creative work:

* To maximise exposure and increase distribution

* To rely on innovative business models rather than fully fledged copyright to secure a return on your creative investment

* To contribute to and participate in the public sphere

I.3) What problem does Creative Commons intend to solve?

In the UK, creative works are automatically copyrighted as soon as they are created (thus the moment an artist lifts a pen from a doodle). The problem is that no copyright notice is required to be attached, so it is difficult for creators to declare their copyright intentions. It is also difficult for people who want to use and reuse creative works to identify how such works are available. To solve both problems, CC provides the following tools:

* a set of free public licences sturdy enough to withstand a court’s scrutiny,

* language simple enough for non-lawyers to understand and use

* yet sophisticated enough to be identified by various Web applications

I.4) So what, exactly, does Creative Commons do?

The primary task is to offer artists, and creators of intellectual work, of any kind a set of copyright licences to be used free of charge. These licences help content creators define the conditions in which their copyrighted works can be used by others.

I.5) What are the different copyright options available through Creative Commons in the United Kingdom?

The aim of the England & Wales, and the Scotland, licences is to offer a wide range of options, so artists can mix and match preferences from a menu of options:

* Attribution. Permit others to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work and derivative works based upon it only if they give you credit.

* non-commercial. Permit others to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work and derivative works based upon it only for non-commercial purposes.

* No Derivative Works. Permit others to copy, distribute, display and perform only verbatim copies of the work, not derivative works based upon it.

* Share Alike. Permit others to distribute derivative works only under a licence identical to the licence that governs your work.

I.6) How do I adopt/use a Creative Commons licence?

When you have made your choices, you will get the appropriate licence expressed in three ways:

1. Commons Deed. A simple, plain-language summary of the licence, complete with the relevant icons.

2. Legal Code. The fine print that you need to be sure the licence will stand up in court.

3. Digital Code. A machine-readable translation of the licence that helps search engines and other applications identify your work by its terms of use.

If you prefer to give up all copyright ownership – in the footsteps of innovators such as Benjamin Franklin and modern-day software pioneers – we will help you do that, too. You can dedicate your work to the pool of unregulated creativity known as the public domain, where nothing is owned and all is permitted. In other words, we will help you declare ‘No rights reserved.’

I.7) Whom does Creative Commons serve or represent?

We hope that teachers, scholars, scientists, writers, photographers, filmmakers, musicians, graphic designers, Web hobbyists – as well as listeners, readers, and viewers – can all gain from the use of our tools. CC serves the public interest by providing the framework for a robust exchange of expression, knowledge, and art. We will help people who want to license their work on generous terms, people who want to make creative uses of those works, and those who benefit from this symbiosis.

I.8) Is Creative Commons against copyright?

No, not at all. Our licences help you keep your copyright while allowing you to decide what conditions others can use your work. In fact, our licences rely upon copyright for their enforcement – just like the GNU General Public License. The justification for intellectual property protection is the ‘promotion of the progress of science and the useful arts’. We want to promote science and the useful arts, too, and believe that helping creators fine-tune the exercise of their rights to suit their preferences helps do just that.

I.9) Who funds Creative Commons?

The United Kingdom projects are run entirely on a voluntary basis by their members. The international Creative Commons is funded (details)

I.10) Who started Creative Commons?

The movement was begun in 2001 by US cyberlaw and intellectual property experts James Boyle, Michael Carroll, and Lawrence Lessig, MIT computer science professor Hal Abelson, lawyer-turned-documentary filmmaker-turned-cyberlaw expert Eric Saltzman, and public domain Web publisher Eric Eldred. International CC works to establish national projects. By 2005, over fifteen million webpages, and many other works, had come to use these licences. (more)

I.11) Who leads and speaks for Creative Commons for the whole United Kingdom?

Nobody. For the two projects, see the ‘People’ page for Scotland and for England & Wales?. If you want comment on a UK matter, speak to both projects. If you are looking for somene who can articulate CC policy more generally, go to .

II. The Creative Commons licences:

II.1) Why should I turn my work over to the public domain, or make it available under a Creative Commons licence, if copyright provides more legal protection?

1. Some people may be attracted by the notion of others building upon their work, or by the prospect of contributing to an intellectual commons. As the CC community grows, licensors will have the satisfaction of helping develop new ways to collaborate.

2. To encourage distribution of creative work. Examples include:

* Scholars might want writings to be copied and shared to easily spread ideas.

* Designers can encourage the unfettered dissemination of sketches to build reputations.

* Established commercial musicians might post samples to whet the public’s appetite for other, fully protected songs.

* Political activists may want messages to reach the widest possible audience through unlimited copying.

CC licences can help implement such strategies, all the while leaving you in ultimate control of your copyright.

II.2) Does it cost me anything to use your licences?

No. They are free.

II.3) Will works that use Creative Commons licences be in the ‘public domain’?

If you want to put your work in the public domain – the realm of creative material unfettered by copyright law – we can help you do that. If you want to keep your copyright and a measure of control, you can use one of our licences. These licences will not release your work into the public domain, but they will encourage creative re-uses of your work in ways that full copyright protection does not.

II.4) If I choose the non-commercial licence option, can I still make money from my licensed works?

Yes, absolutely. The ‘non-commercial use’ condition applies only to others who use your work, not to you (the copyright holder). When other people use or trade or copy your work, they cannot do so for ‘monetary compensation or financial gain’, unless they get your permission.

One of our central goals is to encourage people to experiment with new ways to promote and market their work. In fact, we designed the non-commercial licence option to be a tool to help people make money from their work, by allowing them to maximise the distribution of their works while keeping control of the commercial aspects of their copyright.

Take this example: You license your photograph with a non-commercial licence and post it on your website. An editor at Spectacle, a for-profit magazine, comes across your photo and wants to use it for the next issue’s cover. Under the non-commercial term, the editor could copy your photograph and show it to her friends and co-workers, but she would have to strike a separate deal with you (for money, if you are smart) to use it for the magazine.

However, you need to be careful: once a copy of your work is out under a CC licence, you CANNOT STOP its further distribution for non-commercial purposes for free. This means that if you are to make money you have to find a way to do it while people can find copies of your work on the Internet for free.

II.5) I’m not clear what is meant by ‘non-commercial’; what does this form of licence not allow?

(explain and point to list of examples)

II.6) I am registered with a collecting society. Does this mean that I cannot use Creative Commons to publish my work?

The ‘non-commercial’ licences allow for royalties to be collected for commercial use, so they do not affect any of the commercial rights of the author; they are non-exclusive, and allow you to licence your work commercially in parallel. The ‘commercial use’ licences, however, do not do so; they allow royalty-free use by anyone. Thus, in practice, only work issued under a ‘non-commercial’ form of licence could also be issued with a collecting society. However, it is a matter for people to clarify with particular collecting societies, not all of which have the same policies. Accordingly, individual artists who are registered with a collecting society should consult with it to establish their rights.

II.7) What legal standing will Creative Commons licences have in other countries?

We have worked hard to craft the licences to be enforceable worldwide. We cannot account for every last nuance in the world’s various copyright laws, but we believe that they should be effective and enforceable everywhere, in the same way as other copyright licences. There are similar projects in many other countries, and so far nobody has found a country whose laws would not recognise them!

II.8) What are the differences between Creative Commons-England & Wales and Creative Commons-Scotland licences?

From a userÂ’s point of view, their end effect is much the same, as it is for all CC licences from anywhere in the world. There are however a number of differences, mostly driven by legal differences in the two countries, but also by different views on drafting style, in how they get there. Thus, the Scottish licence (like the Spanish, Dutch, and French, for example) is written as a contract between the licensor and the user; but the English licence (like the Canadian, Israeli,and generic, for example) is not. They have, of course, different jurisdiction provisions. The language of the Scottish licence (which was drafted later) is simpler. And so on. But thereÂ’s nothing to worry about in either case, if youÂ’re happy with the general idea!

II.9) I am a United Kingdom body or institution. Do I need to use both?

No, nobody needs to use more than one licence for any one piece of work; all the licences are designed to work worldwide. You should use whichever you feel most comfortable with; that probably means the one for the country youÂ’re based in. (CIE project details here)

II.10) Are some combinations of the custom licence options incompatible?

Yes. There is one combination of options that does not make sense: No Derivative Works combined with Share Alike. This combination does not work because the Share Alike condition applies only to derivative works. If you choose both options, we will give you a friendly reminder about this and ask that you please make your selection again. Note that every CC licence requires licensees to attach the original licence terms to every verbatim copy they distribute. So if you copy a music file licensed under a non-commercial licence, you must tell the world that your copy of that file is also licensed under a non-commercial licence. The Share Alike option simply extends this requirement to all derivative works as well. So if you were to use that same non-commercial MP3 in a documentary film, the Share Alike provision would oblige you to license your film under a non-commercial licence, too.

II.11) I am using a generic Creative Commons licence; should I switch and use a Scottish or an England & Wales licence?

You may well feel that you donÂ’t need to take the trouble; both sets of licences are designed to give the same bundle of rights as the generic licences, so that they can be used worldwide. However, we feel that there are advantages to switching: to a Scottish licence if you live in Scotland, or an English licence if you live in England or Wales (neither set should be used if you live in Northern Ireland, the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man; use the generic licence). These licences have been designed to be fully compatible with national contract and copyright law. Some benefits from using a UK licence would be:

* their plain English language; far easier to understand than the American legal language of the generic licences;

* because they follow national contract and copyright law, they offer explicit protection of your ‘moral rights’;

* the support offered by the Scottish and the England & Wales projects, and their helpful joint mailing list;

* in the very unlikely event of any dispute over the terms of the licence, they provide that this should be heard in the courts of your own country;

III. About copyright

(needs fleshing out with links to sites dealing with copyright law and references)

III.1) What is copyright?

Copyright is a system to promote the creation of, and access to artistic, literary, musical, dramatic and other creative productions. In principle, the creator, i.e. the author, maker or artist, etc. has the exclusive right to authorise or to prevent copying. In practice, the power to control copying more frequently devolves to publishers and distributors to whom the creators have assigned their rights. In the United Kingdom, it is regulated by statute; the main statute is the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (referred to here as the Copyright Act for short).

The Copyright Act is usually presented as a balance between promoting the public interest by encouraging the dissemination of works of the arts and intellect, and obtaining a just reward for the copyright holder (or, more accurately, to prevent someone other than the holder from appropriating whatever benefits may be generated). For this reason, the exclusive rights of copyright holders, sometimes called monopoly rights, are subject to certain limitations in favour of public access for ‘fair dealing’, such as news reporting, research, criticism or private study, or for other purposes, such as archiving by an educational institution.

The proper balance lies not only in recognizing the copyright holder’s rights but in giving due weight to their limited nature. In crassly economic terms it would be as inefficient to overcompensate artists and authors for the right of reproduction as it would be self-defeating to undercompensate them. Excessive control by holders of copyrights and other forms of intellectual property may unduly limit the ability of the public domain to incorporate and embellish creative innovation in the long-term interests of society as a whole, or create practical obstacles to proper utilisation.

III.2) Can anything be copyrighted?

No, there are several requirements to claim copyright protection.

First, a work must fit into one of the four major categories in the Copyright Act, it must be either: literary, dramatic, musical or artistic.

Second, according to the common law the work must be fixed in some tangible form meaning that only the expression of an idea but not the idea itself can be copyrighted. Simplified, the means, for example, the plot of a book in the writer’s head could not be copyrighted, but the manuscript incorporating the plot could. The claim is not to ideas, but to the order of words, and this order has a marked identity and a more or less permanent endurance.

Third, the work must be ‘original’. The legal definition of originality has given rise to considerable difficulty but it is generally agreed that ‘originality’ in copyright does not mean that the work must be the expression of original or inventive thought, but only with the expression of thought. The Act does not require that the expression must be in an original or novel form, but that it should originate from the author and not from another work.

III.3) Do I have to register my copyright in order to get protection?

No, although copyrights may be registered, protection is effective even without registration. A copyright arises once a work or sound recording is made, or once a performance or broadcast signal occurs. The copyright remains in full force whether or not it is registered

III.4) How long does copyright last?

In the UK, copyright lasts until the end of the year the author dies plus 70 years.

For example, if a poet published a poem in 1922 and lived another eighty years, her poem would not enter the public domain until December 31, 2073; so a total of 150 years. However, if the same poet died in 1934, her poem would have already entered the public domain in 2005.

This is valid for every work which is originated in the UK. Others will be protected for the term for which it is granted protection in its country of origin, but never more than 70 years after the end of the year the author died.

There are some exceptions; for example, sound recordings and films are protected for only fifty years after they are released.

III.5) What is the ‘public domain’?

In copyright, the realm of works that are not protected either because their term of protection has expired, or because they were released by the creator without intention of claiming copyright, is known as the public domain. Works in the public domain can be appropriated by anyone without liability for infringement.

III.6) What rights do copyright holders have?

Copyright is actually a bundle of rights, which can be divided into two categories: (1) exclusive or monopoly rights and (2) moral rights. See ‘What are exclusive or monopoly rights?’ and ‘What are moral rights?’

III.7) What are exclusive or monopoly rights?

Exclusive rights in copyright, include

* the right to produce or reproduce a work or any substantial part of a work, in any material form;

* the right to perform a work, or any substantial part, in public;

* to publish an unpublished work or any substantial part;

* the right to translate a work; to convert a dramatic work, i.e. a play to a novel; to convert a dramatic work by way of performance, i.e. to convert a novel to a play;

* to make any sound recording;

* to adapt a work as a cinematographic work, i.e. a novel to a movie;

* to communicate the work by telecommunication to the public, i.e. to send a work to another person using an e-mail program;

* to present a work at an artistic exhibition;

* to authorise somebody other than the copyright holder to do any of the above acts.

III.8) What are moral rights?

An author of a work has a right to the integrity of their work and to be associated with their work by name, unless they choose otherwise. Unlike exclusive or monopoly rights, moral rights cannot be assigned to another person, but they can be waived in whole or in part.

IV. Creative Archive and Creative Commons:

(explain what Creative Archive is, point to its site)

(needs clearer exposition, directed towards the practical differences)

IV.1) What if I want to mix Creative Archive and Creative Commons Content:

This would be possible:

* under CC licences that allow derivative works and do not contain the Share Alike Licence Element, i.e.: CC-nc-by and CC-by. It would NOT be possible to mix CA licences with any CC-nd as they would not allow derivative works to be created or with CC-sa as they would allow only derivative works that would adhere to the same terms and conditions as the CC licences and this is not the case for CA licences.

* If a work is licensed simultaneously both under CA and CC licenses. This is possible since both licences are non exclusive (CA s.2.1, CC-EW s.2.1). That would practically mean that you do not really mix work licensed under CC and CA but under CA only.

IV.2) What are the differences between Creative Archive and Creative Commons licences?

There are a number of differences between the two licences:

1. The CC licences have (at least) five variations of licences, whereas the CA licence has only one version. This practically means that works licensed under CA may be mixed only with work licensed under certain versions of the CC licences (namely CC-nc-by and CC-by).

2. The preamble of the CA provides that it allows use and distribution of the relevant works only within the UK.

3. YOU is defined as ‘a private individual or member of an educational establishment’ whereas there are no such restrictions in the CC-EW licence.

4. There is a definition of Crediting/ Attributing the author, which is not included in the CC-EW licences as a definition but may be derived from s.2.1. (under the ‘You Must’ section, second bullet) and s.2.3.

5. The definition of ‘No-Endorsement’ (‘No-Endorsement’ means that You must not use the Work and/or Derivative Work in any way that would suggest or imply the Licensor’s support, association or approval) does not exist in the CC licences. This is due to the fact that the CA licence originates from the BBC that wishes not to be associated with any use of the work potentially inconsistent with its mission. Such a limitation does not exist in the CC licences. This is a problematic clause if seen in the face of the attribution clause: How is it possible to seek crediting of the BBC as the original author/ licensor of the work and at the same time actively denying any association with it? For further criticism on the same clause, also see point vi.

6. The definition of ‘Non-Commercial’ (‘Non-Commercial’ means personal use or use for educational purposes within any educational establishment listed in Annexe A, but excludes any commercial use (including professional, political or promotional uses)) is different from that of the CC licences. According to Annexe A ‘For the purposes of this Licence, an educational establishment shall mean: those bodies set out under S174 of the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988, which include schools, universities, higher education colleges and colleges of further education – museums accredited by the MLA (Museums, Libraries and Archives Council) or funded/sponsored by the DCMS (Department for Culture, Media and Sport)’. This is a provision that sets constrains in the use of the work that do not exist in any of the CC licences. The fact that limitations in the political use of the original or derivative works are imposed is not entirely clear in the face of the No-Endorsement clause: how is it possible to seek to exercise control over the use of the licensed work and at the same time to deny any association with that material.

7. The CA licence contains a definition of Share that does not exist in the CC licences: ‘“Share” means to communicate or make available to other members of the public by publishing, distributing, performing or other means of dissemination.’

8. The CA licence contains a definition of ShareAlike? that does not exist in the CC Licences: ‘”Share-Alike” means Sharing the Work and/or Derivative Work under the same terms and conditions as granted to You under this Licence.’ The problem is that the scope of the ShareAlike? element in the CA licences is different from that of the CC licences. In the latter it refers only to the derivative works, whereas in the former to both original and derivative works. Under all CC licences the work has to be distributed/ copied under the same terms and conditions. It is the derivative work that may or may not be allowed to be created and if it is allowed it may or may not be licensed under the same terms and conditions.

9. CA s.2.2.5 (‘do not use the Work (which includes any underlying contributions to the work) and/or any Derivative Work for any illegal, derogatory or otherwise offensive purpose or through the use of the Work or any Derivative Work bring the Licensor’s (or underlying rights owners’) reputation into disrepute;’) corresponds to CC-EW 2.2 (‘You must not (…) subject the Work to any derogatory treatment as defined in the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988’). The differences are: (a) the CA refers to both original and derivative work whereas the CC licence refers to the Work only and the derivative work will be covered by the same clause if it is a CC-sa licence (b) the CA includes any underlying contributions to the work and the Derivative work, whereas there is no such reference under CC.

10. In CA s.3.1. There is an explicit warranty that the Licensor has cleared all copyrights (‘The Licensor warrants that the Licensor is either the Original Author or has secured all rights in the Work necessary to grant this Licence in respect of the Work to you.’), whereas no such warranty exists in the CC licences. This is because BBC has the capacity of offering such warranty. This would be far to risky for the individual licensing work under a CC licence, especially when mixing work with other individuals’ work and hence we consciously opted not to include such a warranty.

11. CA s.6.4 provides that (The BBC) reserves the right to change the terms of this Licence at any time. Any changes that (the BBC) considers at its discretion significantly alter the terms of the Licence, shall be notified to You.Â’ This is a rather draconian term that we have chosen not to include in the CC licenses as may have a number of complications. For instance, what will happen if the BBC decides to change the terms of the licence for works that have been used for thousands of other derivative works and decides to charge a fee for their use? .

12. The CA licence, unlike the CC licence (see FAQ about collecting societies) does not contain any reference to Collecting Societies.

<a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/"><img alt="Creative Commons License" style="border-width:0" src="http://i.creativecommons.org/l/by/3.0/
" /></a><br />This work is licensed under a <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/">Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License</a>.

<a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/"><img alt="Creative Commons License" style="border-width:0" src="http://creativecommons.org/images/public/somerights20.png" /></a><br />This work is licensed under a <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/">Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License</a>.

<a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/"><img alt="Creative Commons License" style="border-width:0" src="http://i.creativecommons.org/l/by/3.0/80x15.png" /></a><br />This work is licensed under a <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/">Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License</a>.

---