Creative Commons is a nonprofit organization that provides free copyright licenses that allow creators to choose how their works can be shared, reused, and built upon. The organization was founded in 2002 to address problems with full copyright, which can sometimes discourage creation and dissemination of works even if creators want their works to be accessible. Creative Commons licenses provide a legal framework that makes it easy for creators to specify how others can use their works while still maintaining copyright over them. This allows for a balance between protecting creator rights and promoting widespread sharing of creative works.
8. Commons?
•Resources that are freely accessible to any member of a given community
•Natural resources (air, water, parks)
9. Commons?
•Resources that are freely accessible to any member of a given community
•Natural resources (air, water, parks)
•Cultural resources (creative works, scientific works, public knowledge)
12. Creative Commons
• Nonprofit org started in December 2002 to help simplify the
development of a pool of free and legal reusable cultural content
13. Creative Commons
• Nonprofit org started in December 2002 to help simplify the
development of a pool of free and legal reusable cultural content
• Provides free tools that let authors, scientists, artists, and educators
easily mark their creative work with the freedoms they want it to
carry
14. Creative Commons
• Nonprofit org started in December 2002 to help simplify the
development of a pool of free and legal reusable cultural content
• Provides free tools that let authors, scientists, artists, and educators
easily mark their creative work with the freedoms they want it to
carry
• CC offers an alternative to full copyright; lets you easily change your
copyright terms from “All Rights Reserved” to “Some Rights
Reserved.”
15. Creative Commons
• Nonprofit org started in December 2002 to help simplify the
development of a pool of free and legal reusable cultural content
• Provides free tools that let authors, scientists, artists, and educators
easily mark their creative work with the freedoms they want it to
carry
• CC offers an alternative to full copyright; lets you easily change your
copyright terms from “All Rights Reserved” to “Some Rights
Reserved.”
• Voluntary tools for creating a public good – more freely available
cultural resources
49. So, what’s the problem?
• Digital technologies have revolutionized how
creative works are made, distributed, and used
50. So, what’s the problem?
• Digital technologies have revolutionized how
creative works are made, distributed, and used
• Digital technologies implicate the right to copy
through the sheer nature of how they work
51. So, what’s the problem?
• Digital technologies have revolutionized how
creative works are made, distributed, and used
• Digital technologies implicate the right to copy
through the sheer nature of how they work
• The potential that digital technologies offer also
implicates the right to make derivative works
53. So, what’s the problem?
• Sometimes full copyright discourages creation and
dissemination, even though the creator may want to
encourage these things.
54. So, what’s the problem?
• Sometimes full copyright discourages creation and
dissemination, even though the creator may want to
encourage these things.
• It can prohibit people who might benefit from
creative work from being able to legally use it.
55. So, what’s the problem?
• Sometimes full copyright discourages creation and
dissemination, even though the creator may want to
encourage these things.
• It can prohibit people who might benefit from
creative work from being able to legally use it.
• What if you want to give up some of your
copyright rights and contribute creative work to
the commons for sharing and reuse?
90. CC+ PLoS
Screen grab from
boletinfarmacos.org
Text translated from a CC-BY
licensed article that appeared
in PLoS Medicine in April 2005
91. CC+ PLoS
• Enables free and legal reuse, such as translations
Screen grab from
boletinfarmacos.org
Text translated from a CC-BY
licensed article that appeared
in PLoS Medicine in April 2005
95. Page from Weekend, which used
Curry’s photos in a way that violated
the CC license
96. “In principle, Curry owns the copyright in the four photos, and the
photos, by their posting on that website, are subject to the [Creative
Commons] License. Therefore Audax should observe the conditions
that control the use by third parties of the photos as stated in the
License…The claim [...] will therefore be allowed; defendants will be
enjoined from publishing all photos that [Curry] has published on
www.flickr.com, unless this occurs in accordance with the conditions of
the License.”
Curry v. Audax, District Court of Amsterdam – March 9, 2006,
Interim measure, Case no. 334492 / KG 06-176 SR
107. Some Rights Reserved
Except where noted, the contents of this presentation are licensed to the public under the
Creative Commons Attribution license. The terms of this license are available at
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/.
