Supplemental resources for the Creative Commons course

This blog post provides a list of supplemental resources which augments the Creative Commons Certificate Course textbook's list of additional resources. One resource is provided for each section of the textbook.


New resource: The Magna Carta Manifesto: Liberties and Commons for All by Peter Linebaugh

Book: see https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-magna-carta-manifesto/paper 

Rights: All rights reserved; text is readily available online through a Google search however.

Relevant section of course material: 1: Additional Resources: More information about the Common

Context: UK

Relevance: The additional resources section of the course text provides some resources which introduce the concept of the commons as a space of collectively maintained resources which sustain aspects of the social, material, or cultural lives of a community. This book addresses the same topic in the English legal tradition surrounding Magna Carta of 1215. While Magna Carta is typically presented these days as a very conservative document which established individual rights in the English legal tradition (exported, of course, to much of the rest of the world), this book pushes back against that story and emphasizes the collective struggles which led to the simultaneous issue of the Charter of the Forest alongside Magna Carta. The Charter of the Forest  is a document which guaranteed the commoners of England access to the King's forests to gather resources including fuel, building materials, and limited hunting rights. If you are interested in history, this is a fascinating book; from a thematic perspective, the text makes a case for rights to the common being situated early in the English legal tradition, rather than being antithetical to the English tradition’s Lockean individual rights to life, liberty, and property. Like his mentor the famed social historian EP Thompson, Linebaugh reads a radical current into the history of English law which puts the commons at the centre – and which provides a very useful background for those interested in the history of the commons in the English legal tradition and throughout the world.  The book is a useful complement to the existing resources outlining the background of the concept of the commons.

New resource: Engaging respectfully with Indigenous Knowledges: Copyright, customary law, and cultural memory institutions in Canada by Camille Callison, Ann Ludbrook, Victoria Owen and Kim Nayyer

Journal article: see https://doi.org/10.18357/kula.146

Rights: Free to access under Erudit terms of use

Relevant section of course material: 2.4 Exceptions and Limitations to Copyright; see also 2. Additional Resources: More information about Traditional Cultural Expressions    

Context: Canada - Indigenous populations

Relevance: This paper evaluates the shortcomings of Canadian copyright frameworks in law compared to Indigenous cultural protocols and Indigenous efforts to protect their traditional culture and knowledge. For instance, requirements of fixity in copyright law cannot protect traditional cultures which may evolve and change over time; additionally, traditional culture may be collectively owned rather than individually owned by a cultural group. It is often deemed worthy of protection beyond the copyright term limit of 70 years in Canada. As such, Indigenous protocols for the protection of cultural work are often not articulated under copyright frameworks. Information professionals should work with Indigenous communities to develop protocols distinct from copyright protection for indigenous collections.

While this paper is written about the Canadian context, it primarily addresses non-Western approaches to cultural protection through frameworks other than copyright laws. I thought this might be worthy of inclusion despite the North American subject. The present list of resources on Traditional Cultural Expressions does not include any Canadian resources, so I did not think the topic was overrepresented.

New resource: Creative Commons licenses and the non-commercial condition: Implications for the re-use of biodiversity information by Gregor Hagedorn, Daniel Mietchen, Robert A Morris, Donat Agosti, Lyubomir Penev, Walter G Berendsohn and Donald Hobern

Journal article: see https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.150.2189

Rights: CC BY 3.0

Relevant section of course material: 3.3(1) "Commercial vs. noncommercial use" 

Context: Authors are almost all German; relevant internationally

Relevance: This paper is written with a focus on scientific data publishing. However, it provides a good general overview of the considerations one might take into account before choosing an NC license clause. The authors point out that commercial purposes are challenging to define, and that the NC clause may hinder license compatibility down the line for future reusers of the licensed material and thus severely hamper reuse. While the paper's focus on the 3.0 edition of the licenses renders it somewhat out of date, the general argument against using the NC license except when necessary remains compelling. NC licenses do not clearly define their terms of 'commercial use', the authors write, and authors maintain substantial rights under them. As 'sticky' licenses, reuse of NC tagged works is challenging for those planning on publishing their works under less restrictive CC licenses. While NC clauses allow for more works to enter a Creative Commons licensing world, authors should be deliberate in applying them and use the restriction advisedly. The paper is a very good example of thinking through the consequences of a license choice not just on a single work, but on an entire research ecosystem.

New resource: Licensing Guidance by Social Science Data Editors

Webpage: https://social-science-data-editors.github.io/guidance/Licensing_guidance.html

Rights: CC BY 4.0

Relevant section of course material: 4.1 Choosing and Applying a CC license: "Which Creative Commons license should I use?"

Context: International; lead author L Vilhuber is German-born

Relevance: This page presents specific considerations for licensing research data and code within research replication packages. Replication packages are posted alongside academic research papers. They are used to demonstrate that the empirical findings of a paper are replicable by external researchers. Since these contain software and code, researchers should choose suitable software licenses as well as data licenses for the material. Typically this means the use of a permissive license such as BSD-3 for software, and CC BY for code; however, other approaches are possible as well, such as using CC0 to dedicate both the code and data to the public domain. The guidance presents a useful commentary on the relationship between CC and software licenses, especially in contexts where both are needed. The text considers the types of licenses necessary for compound objects containing software and non-software elements, and for the precise mechanics used to license these resources.

New resource: Implementing open licensing in government open data initiatives: a review of Australian government practice by Anne Fitzgerald, Neale Hooper and John S. Cook

Journal article: see https://doi.org/10.1145/2491055.2491094

Rights: Free to access and reproduce for personal or classroom use under ACM license    

Relevant section of course material: 5.5: Opening up your institution (CC for academic librarians): "5. Leverage existing strategic documents to support open education."             

Context: Australia

Relevance: This paper makes a good case for the utility of open access materials in scholarship/education outside of traditional universities and in government contexts. The article points to the role of CC licenses in encouraging open approaches to governance and encouraging scholarly uses of government data. For the Australian government, CC BY is used to maximize openness and reusability of government data. The government's use of the license is based on the recognition that publicly funded data should not be restricted any more than is strictly necessary. For those interested in opening up their institution, having a significant body like the Australian state on board with open licensing presents a compelling argument in favour of Creative Commons' use. While existing organizational strategic documents within an organization can be used to make compelling arguments, using peer institutions such as government research bodies as benchmarks can support these arguments with successful examples as well.

This list of resources and the commentary is copyright 2024 Scott Cameron and licensed under a CC BY 4.0 International.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is the point of copyright?

Image
  What is the point of copyright? While our last post might have led to some ambiguity on this point, copyright does not exist to protect the Disney corporation’s exclusive rights to Mickey Mouse. Maybe an introduction to what copyright entails will be in order. Copyright applies to all “literary and artistic works” as soon as they are created – even if their creator has no intention of ever marketing or circulating them. Copyright laws are intended to protect creators’ economic and moral rights over their own creative work – and are applicable and enforceable to works whether claimed by the author or not. Copyright is automatic! What are economic and moral rights? By economic rights, we mean the rights of a creator to market or license their work for redistribution or sale exclusively. This right can be sold, ceded, or negotiated to others. However, without obtaining permission from the author, copyrighted works may not be sold or redistributed by any other party. Moral ...
Read more

What is Creative Commons: A brief history

Image
What is Creative Commons?  A brief history Why do people create things? Why do people write poems, stories, and books, sing their own songs, paintings or photographs? For fame? Fortune? Of course, there are always a few who make it big, or even those who derive a stable living from their art. But do people perhaps take on creative ventures for less materialistic reasons? Is there a reason we  make things other than just the hope for direct monetary compensation? Are our creative ventures meant to be shared, more than perhaps they are intended to be monetized? The rise of the Creative Commons movement suggests that this may in fact be the case – that for billions of people, creating something and sharing it directly with the hopes that others will find it interesting or useful enough to reuse or share is enough of a reward. You may have seen the Creative Commons logo or license on a variety of media you might have encountered online – a Flickr image, a Wikipedia artic...
Read more