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

Fri Aug 30 18:59:46 CEST 2013

Dear Stacco,

may I suggest an announcement regarding this adoption;

and: I would propose a consortium of organisations adopting the PPL, which
the p2p-f can join

dmytri: any other org's that could join?

Lionel, is there any way we can formulate the progress you are making in
France?

On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Stacco Troncoso
<staccotroncoso at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hello!
>
> Great stuff. I think we can go ahead and replace the CC text widget with a
> text box indicating that all translated content is under a PPL license and
> the link to the full text.
>
> All of all collaborators are on board with the idea of switching licenses.
> In regards to the retroactive change, all of the republished content I've
> observed falls within the parameters of free use defined by the PPL, so I
> don't think we'll have any problems there.
>
> Very interested in the logo (maybe including the Foundation's own logo in
> the design?) and the projected website. Legal Spanish is far from my
> speciality, so I don't feel qualified to translate any of the legal text of
> the license, but I'll be glad to translate any FAQs, descriptions and the
> common deed. I'll scoop around for legal translators for the actual text of
> the license, maybe Carolina knows someone who's already worked on
> translating CC content who'd be interested?
>
> Stacco
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 6:24 AM, Michel Bauwens <michel at p2pfoundation.net>wrote:
>
>> 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/
>>
>
>
>
> --
> - Stacco Troncoso <http://about.me/staccotroncoso>
>
>

-- 
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/20130830/04fedf70/attachment-0001.htm 