[okfn-discuss] registration and "relinquishment"

Sun Jul 27 16:58:38 UTC 2008

On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 9:29 AM,  <jo at frot.org> wrote:
>  Creative Commons and others are currently developing tools to
>  certify the public domain status of a work or to determine the status
>  of works with unknown status. This session will also touch on the role
>  of copyright registries ... http://communia-project.eu/node/109
>
> I would be interested to hear more about what CC are doing with this.

Relinquishment, see http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC0

Certifying/determining status of works -- next thing we're working on,
including a PD assertion/certification that would help others
independently verify the status of a work, and collaboration with
projects like OpenLibrary and OKFN.

Registries could support this work, but registries are hard to define.
 See presentations and video from
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Creative_Commons_Technology_Summit_2008-06-18

> Also supposing that CKAN is one of the "and others" concerned.
>
> Doesn't this look like a DRM worldview? I've heard the argument from
> (Geo)DRM fans that their work is in the interests of openess because
> it serves to provide assurance that works are free and for public use.
> I'm reminded of the work done for the recent EU funded project Orchestra:
>
>  Therefore for the purposes of the prototype rights management
>  capability we drew inspiration from and extended the standard
>  licensing terms as defined in Creative Commons [0]
>  http://www.eu-orchestra.org/docs/ORCHESTRA-Book.pdf section 7.5

Curious looking pictures, but I see no details. :)

> ... thus combining CC terms with a set of different DRM restrictions.
>
> So of course work on registration and *certification* of works
> serves equally well to close as it does to open.

This is debatable. DRM requires local software that attempts to
control what a user can do with content. Historically the intersection
of DRM and digital rights description/expression/rights management
information has been just about nil. So much so it has long been a
curiosity of mine. Availability of information about a work won't make
DRM suddenly start working.

> I wonder to what extent CC's development of work in this area has been
> driven by approaches from restrictions-focused projects like this.

Not at all.

> "Double edged sword" i hear you say. Well yes but it would be
> preferable not to have a sword in the first place. What other kinds of
> "solutions" may be out there that serve the purposes of making it
> easier to find, reuse and have assurance of quality - *without*
> having this property of encouraging restriction and over-precision
> on the flipside?

I haven't seen this flipside.

Mike