[Foundation-l] Decision on Creative Commons 3.0

David Gerard dgerard at gmail.com
Sun Jun 3 04:11:36 UTC 2007

On 03/06/07, Mike Linksvayer <ml at creativecommons.org> wrote:

> The language is not intended to introduce moral rights where none exist
> (which is basically only the U.S.) -- "Except ... as may be otherwise
> permitted by applicable law" -- e.g., in the U.S. mutilation (or
> whatever) is permitted because there is no right of integrity that
> prohibits it. In retrospect wording like "In those jurisdictions in
> which the right of integrity exists, and except ..." would have made
> this more obvious. We will put this in the hopper for 4.0, which
> hopefully is a very long way off. However, I do not see how 3.0 can
> reasonably be thought to endanger the commons (generic and Wikimedia
> Commons in particular) as it does not attempt to add any restriction
> beyond what is inherent in each jurisdiction's moral rights or lack
> thereof. Note that I work for CC but am not a lawyer and this is not a
> legal opinion.

I do still have to ask:

What on *earth* were you all thinking?

- d.

More information about the foundation-l mailing list