Creative Commons International The International License Porting Project

When Creative Commons (CC) was founded in 2001, the core Creative Commons licenses were drafted according to United States Copyright Law. Since their first introduction in December 2002, Creative Commons licenses have been enthusiastically adopted by many creators, authors, and other content producers – not only in the United States, but in many other jurisdictions as well. Global interest in the CC licenses prompted a discussion about the need for national versions of the CC licenses. To best address this need, the international license porting project (“Creative Commons International” – formerly known as “International Commons”) was launched in 2003. Creative Commons International works to port the core Creative Commons licenses to different copyright legislations around the world. The porting process includes both linguistically translating the licenses and legally adapting the licenses to a particular jurisdiction such that they are comprehensible in the local jurisdiction and legally enforceable but concurrently retain the same key elements. Since its inception, Creative Commons International has found many supporters all over the world. With Finland, Brazil, and Japan as the first completed jurisdiction projects, experts around the globe have followed their lead and joined the international collaboration with Creative Commons to adapt the licenses to their local copyright. This article aims to present an overview of the international porting process, explain and clarify the international license architecture, its legal and promotional aspects, as well as its most recent challenges.

Governance of Massive Multiauthor Collaboration – Linux, Wikipedia, and Other Networks: Governed by Bilateral Contracts, Partnerships, or Something in Between?

Open collaborative projects are moving to the foreground of knowledge production. Some online user communities develop into longterm projects that generate a highly valuable and at the same time freely accessible output. Traditional copyright law that is organized around the idea of a single creative entity is not well equipped to accommodate the needs of these forms of collaboration. In order to enable a peculiar network-type of interaction participants instead draw on public licensing models that determine the freedoms to use individual contributions. With the help of these access rules the operational logic of the project can be implemented successfully. However, as the case of the Wikipedia GFDL-CC license transition demonstrates, the adaptation of access rules in networks to new circumstances raises collective action problems and suffers from pitfalls caused by the fact that public licensing is grounded in individual copyright. Legal governance of open collaboration projects is a largely unexplored field. The article argues that the license steward of a public license assumes the position of a fiduciary of the knowledge commons generated under the license regime. Ultimately, the governance of decentralized networks translates into a composite of organizational and contractual elements. It is concluded that the production of global knowledge commons relies on rules of transnational private law.

Creative Commons Olympics. How Big Media is Learning to License From Amateur Authors

NBC Universal’s decision to use Creative Commons-licensed photographs in an Olympic broadcast is an example of how media conglomerates are experimenting with collaboration with amateurs, but it also reveals potential problems of letting non-lawyers negotiate copyright licensing agreements. In the process, NBC’s producers nearly opened the door for a multimillion-dollar infringement law suit. To avoid such pitfalls, media companies need to adopt policies and best practices for using amateur licensed works. These guidelines should instruct how a production can attribute collaborating authors and how the Open Content licensing terms affect the licensing of the productions. The guidelines should also instruct how producers can seek alternative licensing arrangements with amateurs and contribute back to the Open Content community.

Open Innovation: Legal Hurdles in the Creation of Contractual Arrangements Governing Idea Competitions?

The phenomenon of Open Innovation has been gaining prominence over the last decade. Idea competitions have been used in a variety of industrial sectors. Nevertheless, the legal issues raised by this topic have not been broadly addressed, yet. These arise from the adverse interests of the actors. The company which organizes an idea competition would usually like to have the opportunity to comprehensively use the solutions, ideas or products submitted by the competition entrants. For the company it is important to obtain all intellectual property rights in the idea, in the product created as a result and, thus, in the rights to be exploited in the future, in particular, patents, utility models, trademarks, copyrights and registered designs as well as other industrial property rights. The participant would like to participate to the greatest extent possible in the success of the submitted solution. This affects, firstly, the question of fair remuneration or further participation in any profits earned as well as, secondly, any personal rights such as being named as inventor or author. The article aims to show the contractual difficulties which have to be addressed tailoring theterms of an idea competition under German law.

A Qualitative Study on the Adoption of Copyright Assignment Agreements (CAA) and Copyright License Agreements (CLA) within Selected FOSS Projects

Open source software projects are multi-collaborative works incorporating the contributions of numerous developers who, in spite of publishing their code under a public license such as GPL, Apache or BSD, retain the copyright in their contributions. Having multiple copyright-owners can make the steering of a project difficult, if not impossible, as there is no ultimate authority able to take decisions relating to the maintenance and use of the project. This predicament can be remedied by centring the dispersed copyrights in a single authority via contributor agreements. Whether to introduce contributor agreements, and if so in which form, is a pressing question for many emerging, but also for established projects. The current paper provides an insight into the ethos of different projects and their reason for adopting or rejecting particular contributor agreements. It further examines the exact set-up of the contributor agreements used and concludes that smart drafting can blur the difference between CAAs and CLAs to a considerable extent, manoeuvring them into a legal grey area. To avoid costly litigation to test the legal enforceability of individual clauses, this paper proposes the establishment of an international committee comprised of developers, product managers and lawyers interested in finding a common terminology that may serve as a foundation for every contributor agreement

A Process Model of Complementarity and Substitution of Contractual and Relational Governance in IS Outsourcing

This paper develops a process model of how and why complementarity and substitution form over time between contractual and relational governance in the context of information systems outsourcing. Our analysis identifies four distinct process patterns that explain this formation as the outcome of interaction processes between key elements of both contractual and relational governance. These patterns unveil the dynamic nature of complementarity and substitution. In particular, we show that the relationship between contractual and relational governance oscillates between complementarity and substitution. Those oscillations are triggered mainly by three types of contextual events (goal fuzziness, goal conflict, and goal misalignment). Surprisingly, substitution of informal control did not occur as an immediate reaction to external events but emerged as a consequence of preceding complementarity. Thus, our study challenges the prevailing view of an either/or dichotomy of complementarity and substitution by showing that they are causally connected over time.

Contractual Difficulties in Environmental Management and the Protection of Biodiversity: The Case of Conservation and Mitigation Banking

This paper offers a principal-agent model of feasible private contracting in mitigation and conservation banking aimed at the protection of natural habitat and bio-diversity of US wetlands and uplands. It is shown that while it is straightforward to design an incentive contract, such a contract may not achieve the federally mandated objective of no net loss of habitat. This is because the minimum payment required as an economic incentive to private agents may be greater than what they should receive for the habitat values that they actually created in the field. This possible problem is shown to derive from nonconvexity in the production possibility set between the biological value of land as natural habitat and in non-habitat uses such as in urban development. The paper concludes with a consideration of several institutional devises that may promote the convergence of private contracting and the attainment of no net loss. These include the payment of subsidies, greater accuracy in the identification of actual quality by the principal, and the use of several incentive alignment devises.

3.5 The Missouri State Supreme Court Conferred a Honorary Law License for Lloyd Gaines.

On September 28th, 2006, the Missouri State Supreme Court conferred a posthumous law license for Mr. Gaines.

An economic analysis of unilateral refusals to license intellectual property

The intellectual property laws in the United States provide the owners of intellectual property with discretion to license the right to use that property or to make or sell products that embody the intellectual property. However, the antitrust laws constrain the use of property, including intellectual property, by a firm with market power and may place limitations on the licensing of intellectual property. This paper focuses on one aspect of antitrust law, the so-called “essential facilities doctrine,” which may impose a duty upon firms controlling an “essential facility” to make that facility available to their rivals. In the intellectual property context, an obligation to make property available is equivalent to a requirement for compulsory licensing. Compulsory licensing may embrace the requirement that the owner of software permit access to the underlying code so that others can develop compatible application programs. Compulsory licensing may undermine incentives for research and development by reducing the value of an innovation to the inventor. This paper shows that compulsory licensing also may reduce economic efficiency in the short run by facilitating the entry of inefficient producers and by promoting licensing arrangements that result in higher prices.

Social License to Operate: Hydraulic Fracturing-Related Challenges Facing the Oil & Gas Industry

The crossroads of urban development and improved technology allowing oil and gas development in new areas can result in contentious community issues. The debate over one of the improved technologies – i.e., hydraulic fracturing – can be highly emotional. Consequently, industry must address community issues, earning trust and therefore a “social license to operate.” This paper provides fundamental knowledge of the social license to operate concept, validates its application to the oil and gas industry, particularly with respect to shale gas development, discusses the current status of social license in the unconventional development sphere, analyzes current ongoing efforts for shale gas developers to monitor and establish a social license, and identifies potential new methods of encouraging, establishing, and monitoring a social license to operate. The paper also proposes a new institutional framework in which to promote the social license to operate, “The Center for Social License to Operate in the Oil & Gas Industry.”