Post by account_disabled on Jan 11, 2024 12:44:59 GMT 1
New fashion in the United States: law firms that suggest their clients give up their intellectual property rights are increasingly pointing to the use of Creative Commons as an astrolabe for this new type of waiver. Creative Commons is a solidarity licensing model originating in the USA that preaches the idea that intellectual property rights, in many cases, end up damaging the image of authors, as many would gain “more exposure than they imagine” when opening hand of copyright.
Eric Sinrod, columnist for the FindLaw website and partner at the San Francisco office of Duane Morris LLP, says that “a significant number of artists and people Special Data in the entertainment sector now prefer to depend on this innovative business, to guarantee the return on their creative investment, the that depends on the old copyright”. Creative Commons believes that an easier way to be accepted in the market is to make it clear that “some rights are reserved and others are not”. The site displays a roadmap on how to legally share copyright using “generous terms”.
Creative Commons argues that “the debate about the control of creations almost always tends to the extreme, in a world in which the paradigm is that every use of a work must be highlighted with words such as 'all rights reserved'”. On another point, highlights Eric Sinrod, there is “the other part of this spectrum saying that a wide margin of freedom makes the work vulnerable to total exploitation”.
Creative Commons, founded in 2001, believes that “a balance between commitment and moderation values creation while protecting it”. How does it work? Through the website, which teaches how to dedicate part of the creation to the public domain and another to retain copyright. Licenses under these conditions, offered by Creative Commons, are not designed for software, but apply to music, films, photography, websites, and literature.
Eric Sinrod points out that Creative Commons is gaining more and more notoriety. For example: Last May, Seattle band Pearl Jam's new song, titled “Life Wasted,” was placed under these Creative Commons terms. In the same month, Creative Commons enabled Internet users to legally remix and put together their personal versions of two songs from the album “My Life in the Bush of Ghosts”, by David Byrne and Brian Eno.
Eric Sinrod, columnist for the FindLaw website and partner at the San Francisco office of Duane Morris LLP, says that “a significant number of artists and people Special Data in the entertainment sector now prefer to depend on this innovative business, to guarantee the return on their creative investment, the that depends on the old copyright”. Creative Commons believes that an easier way to be accepted in the market is to make it clear that “some rights are reserved and others are not”. The site displays a roadmap on how to legally share copyright using “generous terms”.
Creative Commons argues that “the debate about the control of creations almost always tends to the extreme, in a world in which the paradigm is that every use of a work must be highlighted with words such as 'all rights reserved'”. On another point, highlights Eric Sinrod, there is “the other part of this spectrum saying that a wide margin of freedom makes the work vulnerable to total exploitation”.
Creative Commons, founded in 2001, believes that “a balance between commitment and moderation values creation while protecting it”. How does it work? Through the website, which teaches how to dedicate part of the creation to the public domain and another to retain copyright. Licenses under these conditions, offered by Creative Commons, are not designed for software, but apply to music, films, photography, websites, and literature.
Eric Sinrod points out that Creative Commons is gaining more and more notoriety. For example: Last May, Seattle band Pearl Jam's new song, titled “Life Wasted,” was placed under these Creative Commons terms. In the same month, Creative Commons enabled Internet users to legally remix and put together their personal versions of two songs from the album “My Life in the Bush of Ghosts”, by David Byrne and Brian Eno.