[wos] Definition of Free Cultural Works 1.0 Released

[info]

nice one ;)

the copycan collective created these seven rules for content:

1. You can use the content
2. You can modify the content
3. You can share the content
4. You can share the modified content
5. When passed on the full meaning of the 7 rules have to apply to the
...received content
6. The 7 rules expand to all content this content is included in
7. The 7 rules are set irrevocably

greetz

bruder

Erik Moeller schrieb:
> New "Definition of Free Cultural Works" Challenges Authors to Rethink
> Copyright Law
> 
> ''The Internet, February 14, 2007.'' --
> A diverse group of writers has released the first version of the
> "Definition of Free Cultural Works." The authors have identified a
> minimum set of freedoms which they believe should be granted to all
> users of copyrighted materials. Created on a wiki with the feedback of
> Wikipedia users, open source hackers, artists, scientists, and lawyers,
> the definition lists the following core freedoms:
> 
> * The freedom to use and perform the work
> * The freedom to study the work and apply the information
> * The freedom to redistribute copies
> * The freedom to distribute derivative works.
> 
> Inspired by the Free Software Definition and the ideals of the free
> software and open source movements, these conditions are meant to apply
> to any conceivable work. In reality, these freedoms must be granted
> explicitly by authors, through the use of licenses which confer them. On
> the website of the definition, <http://freedomdefined.org/>, a list of
> these licenses can be found. Furthermore, authors are encouraged to
> identify their works as Free Cultural Works using a set of logos and
> buttons.
> 
> The definition was initiated by Benjamin Mako Hill, a Debian GNU/Linux
> developer, and Erik Möller, an author and long-time Wikipedia user.
> Wikipedia already follows similar principles to those established by the
> definition. Angela Beesley, Wikimedia Advisory Board Chair and
> co-founder of Wikia.com; Mia Garlick, general counsel of Creative
> Commons; and Elizabeth Stark of the Free Culture Student Movement acted
> as moderators, while Richard Stallman of the Free Software Foundation
> and Lawrence Lessig of Creative Commons provided helpful feedback.
> 
> As more and more people recognize that there are alternatives to
> traditional copyright, phrases like "open source," "open access," "open
> content," "free content," and "commons" are increasingly used. But many
> of these phrases are ambiguous when it comes to distinguishing works and
> licenses which grant all the above freedoms, and those which only confer
> limited rights. For example, a popular license restricts the commercial
> use of works, whereas the authors believe that such use must be
> permitted for a work to be considered Free. Instead of limiting
> commercial use, they recommend using a clever legal trick called
> "copyleft:" requiring all users of the work to make their combined and
> derivative works freely available.
> 
> Möller and Hill encourage authors to rethink copyright law and use one
> of the Free Culture Licenses to help build a genuine free and open
> culture.
> 
> == Links ==
> 
> * http://freedomdefined.org/ - Official homepage of the definition
> * http://freedomdefined.org/Licenses - Information about specific
> licenses
> * http://freedomdefined.org/Logos_and_buttons - Logos and buttons for
> identifying free cultural works
> 
> == Contact ==
> 
> * Erik Möller - eloquence (at) gmail (dot) com - +49-30-45491008
> * Benjamin Mako Hill - mako (at) atdot (dot) cc
>