[P2P-F] discussing the implications of the peer production license

Fri Aug 30 06:24:36 CEST 2013

this is really great news Lionel, I am very happy that things are moving in
this direction in France,

if anything concrete advances, would be great is someone could write a
paragraph for the blog, as this will be an important milestone,

as you know, this is a dream come true,

also hugely important is: http://p2pfoundation.net/Open_Venture_Movement

On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 8:04 PM, Lionel Maurel <calimaq at gmail.com> wrote:

> We are discussing and working on the concept of the PPL in France, in a
> group of the ShareLex initative. I guess Michel already met Anne-Laure
> Brun-Buisson, the creator of ShareLex ? Some people are interested by the
> PPL in France, especially in the field of the "Economie Sociale et
> Solidaire" (ESS).
>
> We are looking to translate the PPL in french (not a lot of work, because
> the CC-BY-NC-SA has already been translated). But we would also like to
> create a logo and to write a common deed.
>
> I think that's something Dmytri Kleiner could be interested in. Not a lot
> of work, but a significant impact on the appropriation of the licence by
> people. A dedicated website to host the licence, the logo, the common deed,
> a FAQ and some case studies could be very nice too.
>
> I will inform you on the evolution of the discussion in France about the
> PPL.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Lionel
>
>
> 2013/8/29 Michel Bauwens <michel at p2pfoundation.net>
>
>> Thank you so much for these very clear answers Lionel, I'm sure it
>> answers Stacco's concerns.
>>
>> However, in the note to me and Dmytri regarding the logo and common
>> deeds, this is beyond my own capability.
>>
>> While I promote the PPL as an 'ideological' hack, I cannot find the time
>> to work on its actual promotion and development,
>>
>> Michel
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 7:47 PM, Lionel Maurel <calimaq at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Bonjour,
>>>
>>> Je vais essayer de répondre du mieux possible à ces questions, mais mon
>>> anglais n'étant pas très bon, je vais devoir le faire en français.
>>>
>>>
>>>    1.
>>>
>>>    In practical terms: How do we implement the Peer Production License?
>>>    That is to say, do we display it as widget on our site, much like a CC
>>>    license, or do we have to undergo some sort of formal procedure? If so,
>>>    what are the requirements?
>>>
>>> Par rapport aux licences Creative Commons, la Peer Production Licence a
>>> une faiblesse dans le sens où elle ne dispose pas encore d'un logo et d'un
>>> "common deeds" (version résumé en langage simple qui accompagne toutes les
>>> licences CC). En l'absence de ces éléments, le plus simple est d'indiquer
>>> que vos contenus sont placés sous PPL dans les Conditions Générales
>>> d'Utilisation de votre site (CGU ou ToS). Vous pouvez aussi faire figurer
>>> cette mention à un niveau plus fin sur chaque document, sous la forme d'une
>>> note. Dans tous les cas, il faut faire un lien hypertexte vers le texte de
>>> la licence.
>>>
>>> Note à l'attention de Michel et de Dmytri : il serait vraiment
>>> intéressant à mon sens de produire un logo pour la PPL et un "common deeds"
>>> afin de la rendre pleinement opérationnelle. C'est une chose à laquelle
>>> nous réfléchissons en France d'ailleurs.
>>>
>>> 2. What happens with the translations we’ve already published under a CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike
>>> 3.0 Unported License?
>>>
>>> Normalement en effet, on ne peut pas revenir sur la décision de placer
>>> des contenus sous licence Creative Commons, sinon cela créerait trop
>>> d'insécurité juridique, surtout avec la dissémination sur Internet.
>>> Néanmoins, il faut savoir faire preuve de pragmatisme. Ici vos contenus
>>> étaient placés sous licence CC-BY-NC-SA. En passant à la PPL, vous ouvrez
>>> les possibilités de réutilisation par rapport à la CC-BY-NC-SA. Vous
>>> n'enlever des droits à personne. Au contraire, vous donnez de nouveaux
>>> droits à des tiers, puisque davantage de personnes pourront utiliser vos
>>> contenus. Dès lors, vous ne pouvez léser personne et il n'y aura personne
>>> pour venir se plaindre. Du coup, je pense que même si la licence
>>> CC-BY-NC-SA ne le permet pas stricto sensus, vous pouvez passer à la PPL
>>> sans grande difficulté. Ce serait différent si vous passiez de CC-BY-NC-SA
>>> à "Copyright All rights reserved", parce que vous restreignez alors les
>>> utilisations possibles et risquez de léser des tiers.
>>>
>>>         3. In my prior correspondence with Carolina she asked why we
>>> chose the non-commercial feature. I suppose that PPL, like the
>>> NC-Share-alike license, allows for commercial use of the material with
>>> permission from the license holder, correct?
>>>
>>> Oui, tout à fait. La PPL fonctionne sur ce point comme une CC classique.
>>> Elle signale que certains usages commerciaux sont réservés et donc soumis à
>>> l'autorisation préalable du titulaire de droits. Libre à lui ensuite
>>> d'interdire, mais aussi d'autoriser ces usages, une fois qu'on s'adresse à
>>> lui.
>>>
>>> Voilà ce que je peux répondre sur ces questions, en espérant que cela
>>> pourra être utile et en m'excusant pour la réponse en français.
>>>
>>> Cordialement,
>>>
>>> Lionel Maurel - Calimaq
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  2013/8/29 Michel Bauwens <michel at p2pfoundation.net>
>>>
>>>> stacco troncoso / ah uhm of guerilla translations has a very important
>>>> practical query on the ppl, which I can't answer
>>>>
>>>> I'm hoping dmytri and lionel can shed light on this/
>>>>
>>>> Anybody else who could answer this query and should be included?
>>>>
>>>> Michel
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> THE QUERY
>>>>
>>>> QUESTIONS ON THE PEER PRODUCTION LICENSE
>>>>
>>>>  First of all, this license will only apply to the translated material
>>>> we create, not the originals. At any rate, every translation we publish is
>>>> done and distributed with full knowledge and permission of the authors and
>>>> original rights holders.
>>>>
>>>> Questions:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    1.
>>>>
>>>>    In practical terms: How do we implement the Peer Production
>>>>    License? That is to say, do we display it as widget on our site, much like
>>>>    a CC license, or do we have to undergo some sort of formal procedure? If
>>>>    so, what are the requirements?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    1.
>>>>
>>>>    What happens with the translations we’ve already published under a
>>>>    CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License? Is a
>>>>    retroactive change to PPL acceptable, in regards to this previously
>>>>    licensed material? In CC’s FAQ page, under the” What if I change my mind?”
>>>>    heading, we find: What if I change my mind? - CC licenses are not
>>>>    revocable. Once a work is published under a CC license, licensees may
>>>>    continue using the work according to the license terms for the duration of
>>>>    copyright protection. Notwithstanding, CC licenses do not prohibit
>>>>    licensors from ceasing distribution of their works at any time.
>>>>    Additionally, CC licenses provide a mechanism for licensors and authors to
>>>>    ask that others using their work remove the credit to them that is
>>>>    otherwise required by the license. You should think carefully before
>>>>    choosing a Creative Commons license. - I’m not totally clear about
>>>>    this, given that I’d like to apply the new license to all of our page’s
>>>>    content and, depending on the case, note exceptions for certain
>>>>    translations (or the images we use, which are property of the photographs
>>>>    and artists. Some of them are publishing under CC, some are not, but
>>>>    they’re always credited). I understand that anyone who’s republished our
>>>>    material while it was licensed under CC won’t be affected by the change.
>>>>    The basic questions here are: “Can I relicense the material already
>>>>    published in our page under CC as PPL?” and “What happens afterwards?”.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    1.
>>>>
>>>>    In my prior correspondence with Carolina she asked why we chose the
>>>>    non-commercial feature. I suppose that PPL, like the NC-Share-alike
>>>>    license, allows for commercial use of the material with permission from the
>>>>    license holder, correct? (See: Can I still make money from a work I
>>>>    make available under a Creative Commons license?<http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions#Can_I_still_make_money_from_a_work_I_make_available_under_a_Creative_Commons_license.3F>
>>>>    )
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> My understanding of PPL is that it fosters trust among<http://es.creativecommons.org/blog/pmf/#faq_entrada_1004>peers. In the
>>>> hypothetical <http://es.creativecommons.org/blog/pmf/#faq_entrada_1004>case that a newspaper that functions as a co-op and pays all its
>>>> collaborators, decides to republish our work without any sort of monetary compensation
>>>> for us or the authors, then the license would allow them to do so.  In
>>>> <http://es.creativecommons.org/blog/pmf/#faq_entrada_1004>an event
>>>> like that, we’d consider this action to be discriminatory behaviour but, as
>>>> far as consequences are concerned, only the reputation of said newspaper
>>>> within the meritocracy of the Commons would be affected. I think that this
>>>> sort of reputation-based deterrence is very interesting, even if it lacks
>>>> any sort of legal instruments, as it can foster better relations and a
>>>> “watch each other’s backs” dynamic in regards to unethical practises within
>>>> the Commons and P2P movements.
>>>>
>>>> That’s all for now, Michel and friends. Carolina and I are eager to
>>>> learn more about the license. Guerrilla Translation not only wants to use
>>>> it, but to introduce it by means of example to as many people as possible once
>>>> we are sure we understand it completely.
>>>>
>>>> Yours,
>>>>
>>>>  Stacco Troncoso, on behalf of Guerrilla Translation.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  -
>>>> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
>>>>
>>>> <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates:
>>>> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
>>>>
>>>> #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Calimaq *
>>>
>>> Blog S.I.Lex <http://scinfolex.wordpress.com/>
>>> Profil Twitter  <http://twitter.com/calimaq>
>>> Page Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/Calimaq>
>>> Univers Netvibes <http://www.netvibes.com/calimaq#Accueil>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
>>
>> <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates:
>> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
>>
>> #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Calimaq *
>
> Blog S.I.Lex <http://scinfolex.wordpress.com/>
> Profil Twitter  <http://twitter.com/calimaq>
> Page Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/Calimaq>
> Univers Netvibes <http://www.netvibes.com/calimaq#Accueil>
>
>
>

-- 
P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net

<http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates:
http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

#82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/p2p-foundation/attachments/20130830/72604110/attachment-0001.htm 