Copyright stuff

We’ve been having a behind-the-scenes debate at Troppo for some time regarding the copyright claims for material published here. The site has had a standard copyright notice since its inception way back in 2002. However, I have intended for ages to move to a Creative Commons licence which freely allows republication of material with attribution for non-commercial purposes.

As an erstwhile law student, Jacques felt that we couldn’t impose a Creative Commons licence on authors of existing posts and comments without their express permission. Nicholas and I have a rather more relaxed view about it. We think it’s highly unlikely that Troppo authors or commenters will object to Creative Commons terms, and if anyone does then they can contact us and we’ll simply remove their posts or comments. Go and have a look at the new copyright notice and the Creative Commons licence to which it refers, and contact us if you have a problem with it.

Edit by Jacques: I’ve changed the links to point to a license specifically geared to Australian copyright law.

About Ken Parish

Ken Parish is a legal academic, with research areas in public law (constitutional and administrative law), civil procedure and teaching & learning theory and practice. He has been a legal academic for almost 20 years. Before that he ran a legal practice in Darwin for 15 years and was a Member of the NT Legislative Assembly for almost 4 years in the early 1990s.
This entry was posted in Site News, Uncategorised. Bookmark the permalink.
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
9 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Patrick
Patrick
14 years ago

I agree to your imposing a creative commons licence on my posts.

Mark Bahnisch
14 years ago

I’m a big fan of CC so I’m more than happy for my posts here to be so licenced.

Ken Lovell
14 years ago

Anybody desperate enough to republish any of my comments need fear nothing from me.

gilmae
14 years ago

How amusing that the legal code of the Australian-flavoured license refers to US laws.

JM
JM
14 years ago

Ken, I think Jacques has the better position.

The Creative Commons licence *cannot* be applied *unless* the author specifically consents, otherwise normal copyright applies as the default – ie. no republication .

The way Creative Commons works is:-

a.) the author asserts full rights under copyright law (the default position),
b.) but grants a licence to republishers *provided* the republisher accepts *and* complies with the terms of the licence.

Unless a poster provides b.) – the licence – no republisher is safe from a copyright claim under a.) – normal copyright law.

[Just for the avoidance of doubt, I as the copyright holder on this post, hereby grant a Creative Commons licence to all persons should they wish to republish this. I do so in accordance with the new policy of this site. In any and all future posts to this site made by me the same licence will apply as implied by the new site policy. Past posts? Well you can contact me and ask permission.]

Geoff Honnor
Geoff Honnor
14 years ago

Obviously, I would have no objection whatsoever to any of my posts being published under a Creative Commons licence.

skepticlawyer
14 years ago

Same for me, Ken, and likewise over at Catallaxy (where this has never come up, so thanks for raising it).

Now back to the swotting :)

gilmae
14 years ago

Jaques: For a license specifically geared to Australian copyright law I would have assumed it would have been helpful for the CC-crowd to have invested some tiny effort in perusing the relevant Australian laws and using them to replace the US law equivalents.

Anyway, if I had posts here I would object on the basis that you are being too restrictive. Luckily, I don’t :- )