Francesco Poli wrote: > What is not clear to me is: if "Non-waivable Compulsory License Schemes" > are absurd things such as sort-of-taxes on virgin media (recordable CDs, > DVDs, ...), why does the clause included in CC-v3.0 licenses talk about > the right to collect royalties "for any exercise by You of the rights > granted under this License" ? > > | i. Non-waivable Compulsory License Schemes. In those > | jurisdictions in which the right to collect royalties through > | any statutory or compulsory licensing scheme cannot be > | waived, the Licensor reserves the exclusive right to collect > | such royalties for any exercise by You of the rights granted > | under this License; > > I fail to see any connection between buying a CD-R(W) and exercising the > rights granted under the license... > Hence I cannot understand how can those "Non-waivable Compulsory License > Schemes" be things like sort-of-taxes on virgin media.
This is simply how Creative Commons Netherlands explicitly describes it on their website: http://creativecommons.nl/2007/07/31/nieuw-versie-30-van-de-licenties/ Use Babelfish, along with these corrections: The first subheader is "Specific clauses concerning collective rightsmanagement organisations". The first bullet says: > Non-waivable Compulsory License Schemes (for example home copies [the > thing I explained in my previous mail). Because [Dutch] > copyright[law] does not permit author to distantiate from [waive, > transfer] these rights, the [CC] licenses clearly state that the > author retains these right for both commercial and non-commercial > use. How I can collect these royalties, even for free work? - I make a MP3 of me singing some song, and distribute it under a CC license. - Now that I done that, I register myself as rights holder of the neighbouring rights at https://secure.sena.nl/senaregwizard/UI/WizardBasic.aspx?culture=en-GB (Depending on the type of work, I register at specific organisations: Stemra, LIRA, SENA, NVPI, VEVAM, Beeldrecht, Burafo, Norma, or SEKAM -- strangely NONE of these are specifically for software authors yet!) - Someone downloads my work, and burns it on CD. - This person uses a blank CD, which has a € 0.14 fee. - It is so hideous my work appears all over the place (people like to make fun of others). More people pay the € 0.14 fee per CD. - Stichting thuiskopie (association for collection of home copy fees), receives € 8.1 mln for blank CDs sold each year (the actual number is declining). - SONT (Association for Negotiation of Prices for home copies fees - yes there is a seperate association for that!) hires a bureau to do marketing research. - Marketing research shows that 82% of all burned CD's contains audio - 82% of € 8.1 mln goes to Audio-related rights associations. Of this amount 40% goes to authors, 30% to performers, and 30% to producers. - Thus SENA (society for distributing fees collected for neighbouring rights for music performers) receives 30% of 82% of 8.1 (= ~€ 2mln), for just blank CDs. They receive additional money from other "fees". E.g. fees from public broadcasters who broadcasted my song. - SENA does some marketing research too, and acknowledge my song is real popular. I get my share of this 2 mln. Probably € 0.0000001 with my singing capabilities. Nothing can be done to stop this € 0.14 fee. I can waive my money by not registering at SENA, but that simply means this € 0.0000001 is distributed among other artists. *it still is collected*. This right to collect € 0.0000001 is non-waivable. Or in CC legal lingo: I retain the exclusive right to collect such royalties. It simply says that I don't transfer this right for you to claim the € 0.0000001. That's all there is too it. If you really don't like this non-waivable rights, complain with the politics. I actually suspect they listen, remove the rights, and in the mean time disallow making home copies and thus promote further DRM restrictions. As author, I follow this interpretation of the CC. As user, I follow this interpretation of the CC license. I suspect that in the case of a conflict, a judge will follow this interpretation of the CC license. If you still don't like it, by all means use your own license. Actually, you could do like the FSF: fight the system by using their own methods. There is nothing that can stop Debian from registering as a rights society, and as such could become a society to collect these non-waivable fees on behalf of the (open-source) software authors. Regards, Freek -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
