[pp.int.general] A Swedish Rights Management organizationnow accepts some CC licences
r.bakels at planet.nl
Thu May 28 11:08:18 CEST 2009
> This is a step in the right direction, but not sufficient if it is
> limited to the NC licenses.
It is an essential step if rights management organisations learn to accept
that not all authors always want to make money from their works.
In NL, a union of retail stores was fed up by paying copyrights for
background music, so they had background music specifically composed and
performed for them, and purchased the copyrights ("assignment"). Still they
were harrassed by collective rights management organisations (who typically
charge fees unrelated to the actual music played, even for offices), but
eventually the collective rights management organisations accepted the
facts, and - what is apparently more complicated - adapted the
Another problem: in a copyright textbook I read the comment that authors
fundamentally have the right to refuse copyright licences. If Microsoft
wants to buy RMS software, he may say: you don't get it, whatever you pay.
The textbook argues that collective rights management organisations make the
assumption that no one objects exploitation of his works - while that is
actually a fundamental prerogative of the copyright owner. Proponents of
free software and information may not immediately sympathise with people
outright refusing copyright licences, but there are (other) examples when
thgis makes sense: e.g. a nartist may not like that his works are used in an
advertisement campaign, for whatever unsympathetic firm (Microsoft again?)
Interdicting commercial exploitaion is also a CC variant.
More information about the pp.international.general