Darmath wrote: > Gigs wrote: >> Darmath wrote: >>> If I understand your comments in this regard correctly you appear to >>> be trying to suggest that because a recipient of a work covered by >>> the CC-SA or other like license has agreed with Linden Labs that >>> they will not export a work that doesn't bare their name as a >>> creator the person who initially uploaded the content and >>> distributed it to the received is now in violation of the CC-SA. >>> >>> If the above is what you're trying to suggest then I must disagree >>> with you. But I will wait to see that the above is what you're >>> actually trying to assert before i respond as to why... >>> >> >> >> Person A creates content and releases it under CC-SA-By >> Person B uploads this content to Second Life >> Person B distributes the content to Person C >> >> Person C now has additional terms imposed on them that restrict their >> exercise of the rights granted under CC-SA-By because of the TPV >> agreement. Previously they could run any client with export >> capability to download the work in order to modify it. Now they >> can't do that. Their rights to redistribute and modify under the >> CC-SA have been restricted which is a violation of the CC-SA license. > > When I first came across this topic it was 3am and I was on my way to > bed so you'll forgive me for not thinking my way entirely through the > CC-SA. Having considered the issue this morning somewhat fresh I would > agree that Person B may be in violation with that agreement but not > for the reason Gigs (Jason) had initially stated. Initially the > conclusion appeared to be based upon the following from the CC-SA:. > > "You may not offer or impose any terms on the Work that restrict the > terms of this License or the ability of the recipient of the Work to > exercise the rights granted to that recipient under the terms of the > License." > > Putting aside for the moment that I believe that the paragraph is > horribly drafted as a legal document and doesn't accord with its > intent in its wording as far as I'm concerned I don't believe you can > say that as between Person B and Person C, Person B offered or imposed > any terms on the new recipient licensee that curtails Person's C's > rights under the licence. The simple fact is that Person B didn't > impose any terms on Person C or offer the Work to C on any terms that > were more restrictive than what the license does. > > The fact is that Person C would fall subject to obligations to a > fourth Person, Linden Labs (Person D) a result of C's own agreement > with D that they won't export that content from SL unless their named > as the creator. The fact that C's own agreement with a fourth party > means that they now have obligations upon them that interfere with > their rights under the license they entered into and acqured from B, > doesn't mean that Person B imposed more restrictive terms upon C. The > terms that restricted C were effectively imposed by Person D. > > I also think there is potentially a much more interesting analysis > that is capable of following in the circumstances of SL, with regard > to the exchange of the Work from B to C, and that is whether the > exchange can actually be regarded as one exchange between Person B and > C, mediated by a mutual agent in LL (Person D). Or alternatiely > whether two exchanges take place both of which falling subjectable to > the CC-SA or possibly other like agreements. In the latter scenario > the first exchange would take place between Person B and Person D (LL) > and Person C and Person D. One would however have to refer to the TOS > for SL to canvass that possibility. > > Putting the above aside the reason why I agree that Person B falls > into violation of the license from the following from the CC-SA. It > states that: > > "You may not impose any effective technological measures on the Work > that restrict the ability of a recipient of the Work from You to > exercise the rights granted to that recipient under the terms of the > License." > > By introducing the content into an environment where it can't be > easily downloaded and shared with any person quite independently from > SL may very well be considered to constitute the a person applying a > technological measure to the Work that restricts the ability of the > recipient from exercising their rights under the license. > > But that is a fundamentally different from the person imposing terms > or offering the Work to the recipient on more restrictive terms which > is what the initial quotation was referring to. > > Kind regards > > Darren > > > > > >
_______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
