Open License Sites Are Not Actually Open for All Copying
Copyright Alice Neff Lucan 2011
Here’s the disclaimer.The following is offered for your information to help you decide whether you need advice from a copyright lawyer.So read and heed.But if a non-lawyer tries to apply this as legal advice, there is a huge risk that the information will not be applied correctly.One fact omitted or added can change the legal outcome.
It is NOT okay to copy freely from an “open license” site.
The open license web sites are used by artists, authors, educators, software developers and scientists who wish to create collaborative work and dedicate them to public use.Jacobsen v. Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 (Fed.Cir. 2008).Imagine if you were a scientist or software developer, for example, and you could float your theories for all the world to see and add their research or tweak your code. This can be a very good thing, but free license sites are still restricted by copyright law and copyright concepts.If you are going to use material from one of these sites, you usually are required - at a minimum - to:
attribute to the author
mark any changes make and attribute the changes
There are many permutations and combinations of these concepts in open license websites, but two of the primary sites are these:
This is the prototype of the “free license” service and many others are imitations of this original concept.The effort is a good one, but it has to be built on the basis the copyright laws of many countries, so the consideration of copyright protection never leaves you. Despite the creative and collaborative spirit of this website, assume that anything you find on a Creative Commons search is covered by their “some rights reserved” license. With a Creative Commons license, when posting on their website, the author or artists keeps the original copyright but must agree to allow people to copy and distribute the work provided they give the artist credit and follow any other conditions in the license chosen by the artist. There are six types of Creative Commons licenses.You can chose to let anyone copy and change your work, as long as they attribute the original work to you.The most restrictive license excludes commercial users and does not allow changes, plus requires attribution to the author.
Their licenses are described in simple terms at http://creativecommons.org/licenses.Notice that each license has very clear, icon-aided descriptions available under “View License Deed.”The actual terms of the license are hyperlinked to “View Legal Code.”
Furthermore, one of the functions of creativecommons.org is to serve as a search engine.They link you to other sites where the material is protected by formal copyright law as opposed to one of their licenses.Here is their language:
Do not assume that the results displayed in this search portal are under a CC license. You should always verify that the work is actually under a CC license by following the link. Since there is no registration to use a CC license, CC has no way to determine what has and hasn't been placed under the terms of a CC license. If you are in doubt you should contact the copyright holder directly, or try to contact the site where you found the content.
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html
This set of licenses is much more technical because they were developed to encourage the free exchange of software and the manuals to the software.The Free Software Foundation (“FSF”), has developed two primary types of licenses: GNU GPL and GNU FDL..GNU is not an acronym.It is one of the names of a wildebeest or water buffalo, a type of antelope native to Africa.There is no readily apparent explanation for the gnu’s relationship to copyright licensing.
GPL is an acronym for General Public License and it is intended to apply to software.It complements the GNU Free Documentation License, which is intended to apply to manuals and instructions for using software.Both are intended to make it possible for anyone to use another’s software, virtually without restrictions.Instead of “copyright,” they call this “copyleft,” a misleading play on words because copyright has nothing to do with direction and everything to do with the legal power to do something.
According to the FSF, all software should allow
the freedom to use the software for any purpose,
the freedom to change the software to suit your needs,
the freedom to share the software with your friends and neighbors, and
the freedom to share the changes you make
The terms of these licenses are much more technical than the Creative Commons license but they are not designed (usually) for news operation looking for art or text.They are designed for people who have the ability to develop software and/or for people who want to find manuals about operating software without having to pay for them.
Again understand that all works that are original, creative and fixed in a tangible form of expression get copyright protection automatically in virtually all countries (i.e., countries that have signed The Berne Convention). So, if the owner of the copyright has not made it clear that the "free" licenses do apply, then the applicable copyright law will control use of the work by people who want to copy.
Open License Sites