Creative Commons Licensing and Social Media

Creative Commons
(CC) Licensing
Professor Brian Fitzgerald
QUT Law Faculty/CCi

WHY IS IT OF
INTEREST
TODAY?

Generic 2.0 Printing Press by Gastev, http://flickr.com/photos/gastev/360505392

gutenberg press

Generic 2.0 Printing Press by Gastev, http://flickr.com/photos/gastev/360505392

International Agreements
• Berne Convention 1886 • WCT 1996
• Rome Convention 1961 • WPPT 1996
• Phonograms • AUSFTA 2004
Convention 1971
• WTO/TRIPS 1996

Australia – Federal CR Legislation
1905
1912
1968

ICE TV – Purpose of Copyright
“*24+ In assessing the centrality of an author and authorship to the overall scheme
of the Act, it is worth recollecting the longstanding theoretical underpinnings of
copyright legislation. Copyright legislation strikes a balance of competing interests
and competing policy considerations. Relevantly, it is concerned with rewarding
authors of original literary works with commercial benefits having regard to the
fact that literary works in turn benefit the reading public.

[25] In both its title and opening recitals, the Statute of Anne of 1709 echoed
explicitly the emphasis on the practical or utilitarian importance that certain
seventeenth century philosophers attached to knowledge and its encouragement
in the scheme of human progress. The "social contract" envisaged by the Statute
of Anne, and still underlying the present Act, was that an author could obtain a
monopoly, limited in time, in return for making a work available to the reading
public.”

IceTV Pty Limited v Nine Network Australia Pty Limited [2009] HCA 14

Expression
(Not ideas)
Originality
Authorship
Fixed-MaterialForm

ICE TV – French CJ, Crennan and
Kiefel JJ- Idea/Expression
[28] Copyright does not protect facts or information. Copyright protects
the particular form of expression of the information, namely the words,
figures and symbols in which the pieces of information are expressed, and
the selection and arrangement of that information. That facts are not
protected is a crucial part of the balancing of competing policy
considerations in copyright legislation. The information/expression
dichotomy, in copyright law, is rooted in considerations of social utility.
Copyright, being an exception to the law's general abhorrence of
monopolies, does not confer a monopoly on facts or information because
to do so would impede the reading public's access to and use of facts and
information. Copyright is not given to reward work distinct from the
production of a particular form of expression.

[29] These concepts are relevant to the determination, called for by the
Act, of whether a part reproduced is a "substantial part" of a work in
which copyright subsists.

ICE TV – French CJ, Crennan and
Kiefel JJ- Originality
[33] The requirement for copyright subsistence that a literary work be
"original" was first introduced into the Copyright Act 1911 (Imp), although
it had already been recognised at common law. Originality for this purpose
requires that the literary work in question originated with the author and
that it was not merely copied from another work. It is the author or joint
authors who bring into existence the work protected by the Act. In that
context, originality means that the creation (ie the production) of the
work required some independent intellectual effort, but neither literary
merit nor novelty or inventiveness as required in patent law.
[34] There has been a long held assumption in copyright law that
"authorship" and "original work" are correlatives; the legislation does not
impose double conditions.

ICE TV – Gummow, Hayne and Heydon JJ –
Authorship and Fixation
[96] The first principle concerns the significance of
"authorship". The subject matter of the Act now extends well
beyond the traditional categories of original works of
authorship, but the essential source of original works remains
the activities of authors. While, by assignment or by other
operation of law, a party other than the author may be owner
of the copyright from time to time, original works emanate
from authors.
[102] The second principle is related to the first and concerns
the requirement for the subsistence of copyright of "fixation"
of the original work in a material form. It is well established
that copyright does not subsist in a work unless and until the
work takes some material form, so that protection: “does not
extend to the ideas or information contained in the work and
a balance is struck between the interests of authors and those
of society in free and open communication".

literary works

Generic 2.0 Open Book by Osbornb, http://flickr.com/photos/osbornb/2457712870

dramatic works

Generic 2.0 Tribal Dance by BdwayDiva1, http://flickr.com/photos/bdwaydiva1/2306372642

musical works

Generic 2.0 A gal and her guitar by xlordashx, http://www.flickr.com/photos/xlordashx/2936494210

artistic works

Generic 2.0 portrait: yellows and blues by freeparking, http://flickr.com/photos/freeparking/2801058207

films

Generic 2.0 16mm educational film screening by lorelei, http://flickr.com/photos/filmfatale/423329167

sound recordings

Generic 2.0 Audio Technica ATH-M50 by CLF, http://flickr.com/photos/clf/3184796740

broadcasts

Generic 2.0 Kent Portable Tube AM Radio by alexkerhead, http://flickr.com/photos/alexkerhead/3607581577

published editions

Generic 2.0 Side by euphbass, http://flickr.com/photos/euphbass/3317710740

Reproduce
in a material
form

Generic 2.0 Do Not Turn The Photo Copier Off by Beige Alert, http://flickr.com/photos/beigephotos/329699908

reproduce
publish

Generic 2.0 The Fruits of Religion 1 by andymangold, http://flickr.com/photos/andymangold/3489545384

reproduce
publish
perform in public

Generic 2.0 Red drapery by shaire productions, http://flickr.com/photos/shaireproductions/3056579358

reproduce
publish
perform in public
perform
communicate to the public

Generic 2.0 Toy sampling megaphone by altemark, http://flickr.com/photos/altemark/337248947

reproduce
publish
perform in public
perform
communicat
e
adaptation (except artistic)

Generic 2.0 Cut my breath by batega, http://flickr.com/photos/batega/1467019878

reproduce
publish
perform in public (l, d, m)
perform
communicat
e
adaptation (except artistic)
commercial rental (limited application)

S.O.T.W
RIGHTS
(Sound recordings and films)

copy

Generic 2.0 Do Not Turn The Photo Copier Off by Beige Alert, http://flickr.com/photos/beigephotos/329699908

copy
cause to be (seen/heard in public)

Generic 2.0 Red drapery by shaire productions, http://flickr.com/photos/shaireproductions/3056579358

copy
perform (seen/heard in public)


copy
perform (seen/heard in public)
(also commercial rental for sound recordings)


Generic 2.0 No unauthorised persons @ Troutbeck Road, Sheffield by timparkinson, http://flickr.com/photos/timparkinson/3248398830

automatic protection
registration not required
notification not required

Generic 2.0 No unauthorised persons @ Troutbeck Road, Sheffield by timparkinson, http://flickr.com/photos/timparkinson/3248398830

S.M.O.T.W = maker
(note: published editions)
works = author; employer

Generic 2.0 Desk Mine by Kitty de Medici, http://www.flickr.com/photos/kittieth/1370989416/

Generic 2.0 Onions by Margot Wolfs by Margot Wolfs, http://flickr.com/photos/margotwolfs/4032976495

Generic 2.0 Stop by brainware3000, http://flickr.com/photos/brainware3000/22205084

Generic 2.0 Stopwatch by wwarby, http://flickr.com/photos/wwarby/3297205226

WORKS = LIFE
+ 70 YEARS
Generic 2.0 Tombstone of Bertha Heilborn (nee Epstein) in Guttentag cemetery by dlisbona, http://flickr.com/photos/dlisbona/1117569429

S.M.O.T.W
Generic 2.0 Compact Calendar Card - Design 3 by Joel Lanman, http://flickr.com/photos/joelanman/367425390

70 YEARS

50 YEARS

25 YEARS

“Objective
Similarity”
“Casual
Connection”
“Substantial Part”

Larrikin Music Publishing Pty Ltd v EMI Songs
Australia Pty Limited [2010] FCA 29
“Kookaburra sits in the old gumtree” (“Kookaburra”) is an iconic Australian
round, written and composed in 1934 by Miss Marion Sinclair. It is a short
musical work, being described and analysed for the purpose of this
proceeding as consisting of only four bars.
Two of those bars are reproduced in the 1981 recording of another iconic
Australian composition, the pop song “Down Under” performed and
recorded by the group Men at Work. The two bars are a part of the flute
riff which was added to Down Under after it was first composed.
The resemblance between the flute riff of Down Under and the two bars
of Kookaburra did not come to the attention of the owner of the copyright
in Kookaburra, Larrikin Music Publishing Pty Ltd (“Larrikin”), until 2007.
Larrikin now claims that the 1981 recording of Down Under, as well as an
earlier recording of that song and certain other works to which I will refer
later, infringe its copyright in Kookaburra. “ AT *1+-[3]
Also Trade Practices Act 1974 claims – misrepresentation

“The principles upon which this case turns were succinctly stated by Gibbs CJ in S. W. Hart at 472. His
Honour observed that the notion of reproduction for the purpose of copyright law involves two elements:
the first being resemblance to, and actual use of, the copyright work; and the second being a causal
connection between the copyright work and the infringing work. His Honour explained the element of
resemblance by quoting the words of Willmer LJ in Francis Day & Hunter at 614, namely that what is
required is: a sufficient degree of objective similarity between the two works. Gibbs CJ also explained the
second element by quoting from the same passage in Francis Day & Hunter in which Willmer LJ stated the
requirement as: some causal connection between the plaintiffs’ and the defendants’ work. If these two
elements are satisfied in the particular case, the question then arises as to whether the “infringer” has
copied a substantial part of the copyright work. Gibbs CJ explained this requirement by quoting the words
of Lord Reid in Ladbroke (Football) Ltd v William Hill (Football) Ltd [1964] 1 WLR 273 (“Ladbroke v William
Hill”) at 276, in particular: .... the question whether he has copied a substantial part depends much more
on the quality than on the quantity of what he has taken.” AT *32+-[35]

”The process by which the comparison is undertaken between the competing works involves three steps.
The first is to identify the work in suit in which copyright subsists. The second is to identify in the allegedly
infringing work the part that is said to have been derived or copied from the copyright work. The third is to
determine whether the part taken is a substantial part of the copyright work: Metricon Homes v Barrett at
[23]; Elwood Clothing Pty Ltd (ACN 079 393 696) v Cotton on Clothing Pty Ltd (ACN 052 130 462) (2008) 80
IPR 566 at *41+.” AT *60+

“Mr Hay also accepted that for a period of about two or three years from around 2002, when
he performed Down Under at concerts, he sometimes sang the words of Kookaburra at
about the middle of Down Under, at the point at which he reached the flute line. “ AT *111+

“In my opinion, there is a sufficient degree of objective similarity between the bars of
Kookaburra which are seen and heard in Down Under to amount to a reproduction of a part
of Miss Sinclair’s round. The question of whether it is a reproduction of a substantial part of
that work is a different question which I will address later.” AT *157+

“It is true that Kookaburra is a short work and that it is not reproduced in Down Under as a
round. But it was not suggested by the respondents that Kookaburra is so simple or lacking in
substantial originality that a note for note reproduction of the entire work was required to
meet the “substantial part” test.
Nor could any such submission be sustained. The short answer to the qualitative test is to be
found in Mr Hay’s performance of the words of Kookaburra to the tune of the flute riff in
Down Under. In my opinion, that was a sufficient illustration that the qualitative test is met.
The reproduction did not completely correspond to the phrases of Kookaburra because of
the separation to which I have referred. But Mr Hay’s performance of the words of
Kookaburra shows that a substantial part was taken.” *226+ – [228]

Bright Tunes Music v. Harrisongs Music
420 F. Supp. 177 (S.D.N.Y. 1976)
• George Harrison – My Sweet Lord (1971) – alleged to
have been copied from Chiffons, He is So Fine (1962)
• “Did Harrison deliberately use the music of He's So
Fine? I do not believe he did so deliberately.
Nevertheless, it is clear that My Sweet Lord is the
very same song as He's So Fine with different
words, and Harrison had access to He's So Fine. This
is, under the law, infringement of copyright, and is no
less so even though subconsciously accomplished.”

Generic 2.0 Tiny by AMagill, http://www.flickr.com/photos/amagill/3660775191/

research or study (s40)

Generic 2.0 That time of year again… by Etwood, http://flickr.com/photos/etwood/231364920

criticism or review (s41)


parody or satire (s41A)

Generic 2.0 Evil Dead Poster Parodies by jbcurio, http://flickr.com/photos/jbcurio/2593693627

reporting the news (s42)

Generic 2.0 yesterdays news by chaosinjune, http://flickr.com/photos/cijmyjune/521661296

reporting the news (s42)
legal advice (s43)

Generic 2.0 Barrister Bear by Shiny Things, http://flickr.com/photos/shinythings/161216658

TIME
DEVICE
FORMAT
SHIFTING
(ss111, 109A, 43C, 47J,
110AA)

Lennon/McCartney
• Rights to lyrics and music of Beatles – assigned
to a publisher – authors take a royalty
• Publisher sells those rights to Michael Jackson
in 1985 for $47 million
• Jackson sells half share in those rights to Sony
in 1995 for $95 million

hts

VOLUNTARY
LICENSING
(Traditional)

Generic 2.0 Internet Statement by altemark, http://www.flickr.com/photos/altemark/39593706/

Generic 2.0 Proce55ing Source Code by schoschie, http://flickr.com/photos/schoschie/8821223

Generic 2.0 Mail art, Copyleft by Manfred Stirnemann by tomislavmedak, http://flickr.com/photos/tomislavmedak/3804029530

Generic 2.0 And free as in beer by elliottbledsoe, http://flickr.com/photos/flashphotographyandscreams/2798838205

Australia 2.5 Which Creative Commons licence is right for me? by ccAustralia, http://creativecommons.org.au/factsheets/licensing-flowchart

by

by-nc
by-sa
by-nd
by-nc-sa
by-nc-nd

Attribution Attribution-ShareAlike

Attribution-Noncommercial Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike

Attribution-NoDerivatives Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivatives

AUSTRALIA
part of the Creative Commons international initiative
CRICOS No. 00213J

permission beyond the licence

Generic 2.0 Pegatinas Creative Commons by Jose Jiménez, http://flickr.com/photos/impulsenet/157950838

copyright notice


copyright notice
notify of the licence


copyright notice
not restrict access with DRM


copyright notice
not restrict access with DRM
licence-specific restrictions


copy


copy
distribute


copy
distribute
display and publicly perform


Generic 2.0 Hollywood Blvd 03.04.2007 by bossco, http://flickr.com/photos/bossco/411694842

Generic 2.0 Andy in the VAB by adactio, http://flickr.com/photos/adactio/301112397

About 250 million CC
objects on the internet
Over 130 million
photos on Flickr alone

http://openchannel.org.au/blogs/videoslam/

Powerhouse Museum
• released 1500 • 20x increased visitation
public domain • crowd-sourced metadata
photographs to • unexpected discoveries
Flickr Commons (eg locations)
• „Play‟ worksheets • partnerships (eg ABC)
available under CC • reduced costs for
BY-NC Australian community (eg
• encouraged CC for schools)
„photo of the day‟ • didn‟t hurt sales
• collection
descriptions and promotional +
data under CC other benefits
Woman holding decorated bicycle, Phillips Glass Plate Negative Collection,
= net +ve $
Powerhouse Museum, www.powerhousemuseum.com/
collection/database/collection=Phillips_Glass_Plate_Negative

CRICOS No. 00213J

Resource Tools
Sprixi.com
Idee.com -
http://labs.ideeinc.com/multicolr#colors=fde7
75,84b3fc,6e4010,fded99

WHAT DO THE
KEY TERMS
MEAN?

restricts changes


restricts changes
no remixing


restricts changes
no remixing
no translation


restricts changes
no remixing
no translation
note: syncing music


primarily intend for or


directed towards


directed towards
commercial advantage


directed towards
commercial advantage
private monetary compensation


same licence
future version
other country version


copyright notice


copyright notice
creator’s name


copyright notice
creator’s name
others (eg publisher, journal)


copyright notice
creator’s name
licence (and hyperlink)


copyright notice
creator’s name
source (and hyperlink)


copyright notice
creator’s name
source (and hyperlink)
changes


Submission, Upload or Donor
Agreements
• Make sure people have the rights
• One licence with the institution and another
re the end user e.g. CC
• Simply CC licence “in”

NLA – Click and Flick
‘While this is not a condition for contributing to this group,
we suggest you consider licensing your images with a
Creative Commons like “Attribution-NonCommercial”.
Picture Australia selects Creative Common licensed images
when producing audio visual displays for National events
and festivals e.g.: National Folk Festival or the upcoming
2008 National Photography Festival. Because of the
amount of work involved in rights clearing, it is not feasible
to use "all rights reserved" images for audio visual display
purposes. You can find further details about the 6 Creative
Commons licenses on the Flickr Creative Commons page.’
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Case_Studies/National_Library_of_Australia
_'Click_and_Flick'

Fiona Hooton - NLA
Motivations
As the above Flickr group statement shows, the NLA adopts Creative Commons licensing in part because of
the practical benefits it provides, by ensuring that the library has the rights it needs to harvest, maintain
and promote the collection, while still allowing the individual to retain control over how their image is
made available. In an interview published in the program of the iCommons iSummit 2006, Fiona Hooton,
manager of PictureAustralia, indicated that the Creative Commons licences were first suggested by
PictureAustralia's web manager for this reason.
However, the NLA also has philosophical motivations for promoting Creative Commons. As Ms Hooton
puts it, Creative Commons licensing ‘encourages content contributors to think in terms of a librarian
keeping in mind the public benefit of providing maximum access to content as part of Australia’s national
collection’.
Ms Hooton has also indicated that the NLA’s decision to use Creative Commons licensing was in part
motivated by the benefits open content licensing provides for the users of PictureAustralia. Because of the
prohibitive cost of obtaining copyright clearances for such a large pool of material, most of the
photographs available through PictureAustralia are listed as ‘all rights reserved’. Although a number of the
participating institutions have general policies permitting ‘private and domestic’ use of their images, many
pictures in the collection require permission to be sought from the owner institution for reproduction. By
requiring creators who upload their own photographs through Flickr to open license their material from
the outset, the NLA is hoping to ‘develop a pool of Creative Commons licenced *sic+ images which can be
generally used without needing to seek additional permission’. <math>Insert formula here</math>

LICENSING
OUT
YOUR
WORK

Generic 2.0 IBM Think D100 Test by Howdy, I'm H. Michael Karshis, http://flickr.com/photos/hmk/2741404653

CC BY-NC-SA
2.5 Brazil

simultaneous release


alternative endings


alternative endings
20 most-watched films


alternative endings
20 most-watched films
returned to cinemas


Bruno Vianna, Director of Cafuné

the tide of ‘big screen movie-
and-popcorn’ enthusiasts did
not exchange the box office
lines for their computers

Julia Levy, Group Estacão

if there were no demand, the
film would not have returned
to the big screen

Many of these videos address
concerns that are largely
ignored by other funding and
distribution outlets.
Anna Helme, http://creativecommons.org.au/commoners/engagemedia

Creative Commons provides a
very usable framework for
filmmakers … They can allow
reproduction and distribution
while preserving some rights

that leaves open the potential to
recoup production funds
through commercial distribution
of their work.

Steven Starr, CEO of Revver

we work with Creative
Commons to foster a
community that understands
creator rights

the producer mentioned that
they had a lot of great footage
they weren’t able to use in the
film – more than usual…
Bronwen Clune, http://www.inquisitr.com/20350/world-first-cut-movie-
footage-released-for-fan-mixing-under-creative-commons

… I suggested to him we not
let it be wasted and we release
it for anyone to mashup
and play with
Bronwen Clune, http://www.inquisitr.com/20350/world-first-cut-movie-footage-
released-for-fan-mixing-under-creative-commons

ROBERT
GREENWALD
Generic 2.0 RPPH0113.04 by Brave New Films, http://flickr.com/photos/walmartmovie/25346998

CC Sampling
Plus 1.0
Generic 2.0 RPPH0113.04 by Brave New Films, http://flickr.com/photos/walmartmovie/25346998

Robert Greenwald, Brave New Films

…I learned how cumbersome
and expensive it can be to
license footage from news
organizations

I could think of no better way to
walk the talk myself than by
releasing the interviews from
Outfoxed and Uncovered under
a license that allows other
filmmakers to use my material in
new and creative ways
Robert Greenwald, Brave New Films

Generic 2.0 Cory Doctorow by Joi, http://flickr.com/photos/joi/2196901054

CORY
DOCTOROW
Generic 2.0 Cory Doctorow by Joi, http://flickr.com/photos/joi/2196901054

Generic 2.0 Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom (cover) by Cory Doctorow, http://craphound.com/down

Generic 2.0 Little Brother (cover) by Cory Doctorow, http://craphound.com/littlebrother

Cory Doctorow

Most people who download
the book don't end up buying
it, but they wouldn’t have
bought it in any event…

Cory Doctorow

A tiny minority of downloaders
treat the free e-book as a
substitute for the printed
book−those are the lost sales.

Cory Doctorow

…a larger minority treat the
e-book as an enticement to buy
the printed book.
They’re gained sales

30 000 downloads


30 000 downloads
24 hours


30 000 downloads
24 hours
6 print runs


30 000 downloads
24 hours
6 print runs
20+ formats


30 000 downloads
24 hours
6 print runs
20+ formats
8 translations


Generic 2.0 Trent Reznor en vivo desde el Poliedro by Edvill, http://flickr.com/photos/edvill/3129811144

TRENT
REZNOR

NINE INCH
NAILS

United States 2.0 Ghosts I-Iv (cover) by Nine Inch Nails, http://ghosts.nin.com

9 tracks free download


36 tracks licensed


36 tracks licensed
5 payment options


36 tracks licensed
5 payment options
$300 ultra deluxe package


36 tracks licensed
5 payment options
2500 units


36 tracks licensed
5 payment options
2500 units
sold out in 30 hours


36 tracks licensed
5 payment options
2500 units
sold out in 30 hours
$1.6 million+


“The end result is a wildly varied body of music that we're able to present to
the world in ways the confines of a major record label would never have
allowed – from a 100% DRM-free, high-quality download, to the most
luxurious physical package we've ever created.” – Trent Reznor


United States 2.0 The Slip (cover) by Nine Inch Nails, http://theslip.nin.com

1.4 million downloads


1.4 million downloads
2 months


Many of these videos address concerns that are largely ignored
by other funding and distribution outlets. . . Creative Commons
provides a very usable framework for filmmakers … They can
allow reproduction and distribution while preserving some rights . .
.that leaves open the potential to recoup production funds through
commercial distribution of their work. – Anna Helm

http://www.engagemedia.org/

Beatpick
• ‘premium service’ model
• ‘Fairplay’ music label
• All music downloadable DRM free under Creative
Commons BY-NC-SA licence
• Sells ‘high quality’ downloads
• Negotiates ‘commercial’ licences
• Success story – “Memories Child” by Jamison Young
(Australian musician) licensed for “The X-Files: I Want
to Believe“ feature film
• Has also licensed material for ads, video games,
corporate events, political campaigns

http://www.beatpick.com/

Generic 2.0 Yoko Ono by cliff1066™, http://flickr.com/photos/nostri-imago/2873284890

Australia

Image: Koala by Mark Pardew / Associated Press
http://www.ap.org/

Government
2.0
(Taskforce)

Government 2.0 Taskforce Report
Central recommendation: A declaration of open government by the Australian
Government

Accompanying the Government’s announcement of its policy response to this report,
a declaration of open government should be made at the highest level, stating
that:
– using technology to increase citizen engagement and collaboration in making policy and
providing service will help achieve a more consultative, participatory and transparent
government
– public sector information is a national resource and that releasing as much of it on as
permissive terms as possible will maximise its economic and social value to Australians and
reinforce its contribution to a healthy democracy
– online engagement by public servants, involving robust professional discussion as part of their
duties or as private citizens, benefits their agencies, their professional development, those
with whom they are engaged and the Australian public. This engagement should be enabled
and encouraged.
The fulfilment of the above at all levels of government is integral to the Government’s
objectives including public sector reform, innovation and using the national
investment in broadband to achieve an informed, connected and democratic
community.

Recommendation 6: Make public sector
information open, accessible and reusable
6.1 By default Public Sector Information (PSI) should be:
– free
– based on open standards
– easily discoverable
– understandable
– machine-readable
– freely reusable and transformable.

6.3 Consistent with the need for free and open reuse and
adaptation, PSI released should be licensed under the
Creative Commons BY standard as the default.

Venturous
Australia
Cutler Review

Recommendation 7.7

Australia should establish a National Information
Strategy to optimise the flow of information in the
Australian economy.
The fundamental aim of a National Information
Strategy should be to:
– utilise the principles of targeted transparency and the
development of auditable standards to maximise the flow
of information in private markets about product quality;
and
– maximise the flow of government generated information,
research, and content for the benefit of users (including
private sector resellers of information).

Recommendation 7.8

Australian governments
should adopt international
standards of open publishing
as far as possible. Material
released for public
information by Australian
governments should be
released under a creative
commons licence.

Recommendation 7.14

To the maximum extent practicable,
information, research and content
funded by Australian governments –
including national collections –
should be made freely available over
the internet as part of the global
public commons. This should be done
whilst the Australian Government
encourages other countries to
reciprocate by making their own
contributions to the global digital
public commons.

From the ABS website:
Creative Commons licensing is here!
The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) has introduced Creative Commons (CC) licensing for
the bulk of the content on this website. This will lessen the restrictions on the use of free
data from the website considerably by changing the copyright from "all rights reserved" to
"some rights reserved". In effect, what the ABS is asking is only that it be acknowledged as
the source of the data. People are free to re-use, build upon and distribute our data, even
commercially. This makes a wealth of data readily available to the community, researchers
and business, facilitating innovative research and development projects based on quality
statistics, and promoting the wider use of statistics in the community, which is one of our
core objectives.
This step has followed a process of investigation and consultation with various stakeholders
including Commonwealth Government Agencies and the Creative Commons community of
interest. The change was achieved through the release of a new copyright statement on 18
December 2008, and the addition of CC metadata to the footer of each page of the website
on 19 December 2008. A document entitled Attributing material sourced from the ABS
website is also provided.

http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/D3310114.nsf/4a256353001af3ed4b2562bb00121564/8b2bdbc1d45
a10b1ca25751d000d9b03?opendocument?

Geoscience Australia (GA)
• From November 2009 the GA.gov.au website is licensed under CC BY 2.5 AU

Government Information Licensing Framework
(GILF) (Qld)
Stage 2 Report recommendations:

2.1 That the Queensland Government establish a policy position that, while ensuring that
confidential, security classified and private information collected and held by government
continues to be appropriately protected, enables greater use and re-use of other publicly
available government data and facilitates data-sharing arrangements.

2.2 That the CC open content licensing model be adopted by the Queensland Government to
enable greater use of publicly available government data and to support data-sharing
arrangements.

2.5 That the Draft Government Information Licensing Framework toolkit, which incorporates the
six iCommons (Creative Commons Australia) licences, be endorsed for use in pilot projects
proposed for Stage 3, which involves Information Queensland, the Department of Natural
Resources and Water, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Primary
Industries and Fisheries, the Office of Economic and Statistical Research of Queensland
Treasury and the Queensland Spatial Information Council, enabling testing of the CC licences
for multi-agency and whole-of-Government arrangements.

http://www.qsic.qld.gov.au/

Victorian EDIC
Report
• Report of the Economic Development and
Infrastructure Committee (EDIC) on the
Inquiry into Improving Access to Victorian
Public Sector Information and Data

Victorian EDIC Report
• The first in Australia to consider in depth the
issue of access to PSI

EDIC Key Recommendations
• Recommendation 1: That the Victorian Government release a public
statement indicating that it endorses open access as the default position
for the management of its public sector information.
• Recommendation 2: That the Victorian Government develop a whole-of-
government Information Management Framework (IMF) with the
following key features:
– that the object of the IMF is to promote and facilitate increased access to and
re-use of Victorian public sector information (PSI) by government, citizens, and
businesses;
– that the default position of the IMF be that all PSI is made available;
– that the IMF define and describe criteria under which access to PSI may be
restricted, or released under licence;
– that PSI made available under the IMF be priced at no cost or marginal cost;
and
– that the IMF establish a systematic and consistent whole-of- government
methodology for categorisation, storage and management of PSI.

Victorian EDIC Report
• Recommendation 14:
• The Committee was asked to consider how flexible licensing
systems would facilitate reuse of government information
• It recommended that the Victorian Government adopt the
Creative Commons licensing model for the IMF.

• The Committee formed the view that the economic and social
benefits arising from the release of Victorian Government
information at no cost will far outweigh the benefits of
treating it as a commodity.

CC in Government - Spain
The Ministry of Justice in the Government of Catalonia in Spain has explained their adoption
of CC in the following way:
“Nowadays the Internet is about sharing, co-producing, transforming and personalizing to
create new products and services. To create, it is necessary to be able to make use of
knowledge that already exists, without limits, and to share it afterwards. This is the
philosophy of innovation that is now all-pervasive thanks to the democratization of
technology. Creative Commons (CC) licenses are legal texts that allow authors to hand over
some rights of their work for the uses they deem appropriate. So, these licences are an
alternative for managing the author's copyright in a more flexible way. As a public
Administration, the Ministry of Justice has decided to use CC licenses with the idea of turning
over the knowledge created by the organization to the public so that it can be re-used. In this
regard, CC licenses have been essential for this opening-up of knowledge. Thus, for each
item of material or work, the most suitable license is chosen and applied to both digital and
paper formats. The Ministry of Justice played a leading role by publishing in June 2007 the
Administration’s first general-content work to be subject to a CC license. From the beginning,
the Ministry has ensured that external authors of a work sign a cession of rights contract in
favour of the Ministry of Justice in order to allow the Ministry to manage the author's
copyright of the work appropriately through CC licenses.”
See: http://communia-project.eu/node/111

Government Departments using CC
ABS
GA
BOM

Generic 2.0 20081104_Indianpolis_IN_UAWGOTV0304 by Barack Obama, http://flickr.com/photos/barackobamadotcom/3008245391

LEGAL
VALIDITY
Jacobsen v. Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373
(Fed. Cir. 2008)

Bio
Professor Brian Fitzgerald BA (Griff) LLB (Hons) (QUT) BCL (Oxon.) LLM (Harv.) PhD
(Griff)
bf.fitzgerald@qut.edu.au
Website at: http://www.law.qut.edu.au/staff/lsstaff/fitzgerald.jsp

Brian Fitzgerald studied law at the Queensland University of Technology
graduating as University Medallist in Law and holds postgraduate degrees in law
from Oxford University and Harvard University. He is well known in the areas of
Intellectual Property and Internet Law and has worked closely with Australian
governments on facilitating access to public sector information. Brian is also a
project lead and active member of the Creative Commons community. From
1998-2002 he was Head of the School of Law and Justice at Southern Cross
University in New South Wales, Australia and from January 2002 – January 2007
was Head of the School of Law at QUT in Brisbane, Australia. Brian is currently a
specialist Research Professor in Intellectual Property and Innovation at QUT and
through his work with the ARC Centre of Excellence for Creative Industries and
Innovation has been appointed as an Honorary Professor at the City University of
London. In 2009 Brian was also appointed to the Australia Government’s
“Government 2.0 Taskforce” by Ministers Tanner and Ludwig and to the Advisory
Council on Intellectual Property (ACIP) by Minister Carr.

Thank you to the following people for their
assistance: Jessica Coates, Elliott Bledsoe,
Anne Fitzgerald, Kylie Pappalardo and Cheryl
Foong

Creative Commons Licensing and Social Media

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (20)

Similar a Creative Commons Licensing and Social Media

Similar a Creative Commons Licensing and Social Media (20)

Creative Commons Licensing and Social Media