[Foundation-l] RfC: A Free Content and Expression Definition

[Erik Moeller]

On 5/1/06, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I see no
> value whatsoever in being able to modify the works of
> Charles Dickens, the Paris Peace Accords, or the
> Constitution of Singapore.  In all honesty I see think
> this is true for 90% of material on Wikisource.  I do
> not know what works we would have to exclude by
> adopting such a policy, but I am certain that they are
> works which do have a place on Wikisource.

The Creative Commons CC-BY-ND license defines "derivative works"
(which are forbidden) as follows:

- - - - -
"Derivative Work" means a work based upon the Work or upon the Work
and other pre-existing works, such as a translation, musical
arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version,
sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any
other form in which the Work may be recast, transformed, or adapted,
except that a work that constitutes a Collective Work will not be
considered a Derivative Work for the purpose of this License. For the
avoidance of doubt, where the Work is a musical composition or sound
recording, the synchronization of the Work in timed-relation with a
moving image ("synching") will be considered a Derivative Work for the
purpose of this License.

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/2.5/legalcode

- - - - -

I'm sure you will agree that derivative works, as per this meaning,
are useful and essential to Wikisource. Translations, dramatizations,
fictionalizations, art reproductions, and so forth, are all made
impossible under licenses which forbid derivatives.

Erik