Czech Proposal On Copyright Law Would Require Artists To Get Collection Society Approval To Use Creative Commons?

from the the-attack-on-creative-commons-continues dept

The various attacks on more free and open licensing options for artists continues. We've already detailed ASCAP's misguided attack on Creative Commons as some sort of attempt to undermine copyright, rather than simply a way to give copyright holders more options. And now, Slashdot points us to a report from ZeroPaid on a draft of a new copyright law in the Czech Republic, which seems like a direct frontal attack on alternative licensing schemes:
Under the draft text, anyone who wants to use a public license must report to a copyright collective administrator. The administrator would then review the work in question and the creator would have to prove that he or she has created that work in the first place. Then, and only then, can a creator legally use a public license of their choice.
Once again, it looks like the gatekeepers, despite their claims, aren't looking out for the best interests of content creators, but for the best interests of the gatekeepers.

Filed Under: copyright, czech republic, licensing creative commons


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. identicon
    darryl, 29 Aug 2010 @ 8:20pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: How simple is this !!

    I release my own music under CC, and I absolutely do not want that right to be taken away. That is starting to become a real possibility, and it makes me very, very, VERY angry...

    Take a pill or something..

    And you 'absolutely do not want that right taken away'.

    OFCOURSE YOU DONT !!.. So if you dont want the right taken away, why would you allow people to submit copyrighted works, that would render the CC ineffective.

    It's because the authorities, what the SAME THING AS YOU, they want the CC as well,,, JUST LIKE YOU DO.

    THEY ALSO WANT IT TO LAST, and be effective..

    What do you want from it? the wild west ?

    Geez,, again its not that hard, like when you get a drivers license, they make sure you can actually drive.

    If you can prove you can drive, or if you can prove you created the works. You are giving that right.

    If you cannot prove its your works, then its probably not your own works, and therefore you placing it in the CC would damage the CC.

    They are trying to keep the integrity of the CC, and you are whinning about that.

    You basically do what you like with WHAT YOU OWN, so if you own an original works, you can put it in the public domain, you can copyright it, or put it in the CC, or even patent it if it is new and innovative.

    What you cant do, and what they are checking is that it is YOUR OWN WORKS, and if you can prove that (should be easy), you can do what you like.

    IF IT IS NOT YOUR WORK, then you have NO RIGHT to place it in the CC.

    Its that this office saying you have NO RIGHT, you just have no right. And to ensure the success of the CC its important that its kept clean and not used to game the system.

    The same would apply if you applied for a copyright, or a business name, or a trademark, or anything else.

    If you own and created the works, you can put it in anything from the public domainm, freely publish with nothing, the CC, or copyright or whatever.

    Thats simple, im sure you can all work that out.

    ALL you cant to is place other peoples works, works you do not own into the CC, or the PD or to copyright it. ITS NOT YOURS...

    How come you cant understand that ? Is it that complex ?

    There are rules for everything, and requirements to be met, even to get your code licensed under the GPL there are certain requirements set out for your to abide by.

    WHY? so the system works.....

    If there was not checking, rules, then the effectivness of CC or GPL or anything would be reduced to nothing.

    If you just gave out drivers licenses to anyone who asked, and did not check that they could drive. Driving in that country would be a disaster.

    If known copyrighted works started to enter the CC that would destroy the integrity of the system.

    Why have a commens if it cannot be correctly, honestly, and legally administered?

    So again, if you are honest, what is your problem ?

    Do you want to be the one who caused the end of the CC because you wanted to launder copyrighted works?

    Why would you complain about not being able to put works you do not own into the CC.

    You say you put your works in the CC, would you be upset if you found that someone had copyrighted one of your works that you had allready put in the CC ?

    I guess not.. that would be ok for you then, if no one checks that your works are not being used in a way you intended.

    You place your works in the CC because you want too, and you won those works rights.

    If you do no own the works, you cannot place them ANYWHERE, they are not yours.. And how would you feel if you found others taking your CC works, and licensing it under copyright ?

    I would say the CC and the PD are both just the same as copyright and patents.

    Whats the difference ? you claim ownership of a works and attempt to deny others from claiming ownership of that works.

    You can do that with secrecy, copyright, trademarks, patents, creative commons, and the public domain.

    So you hate copyright, but love the CC and basically they are the same things. A claim of rights over the works.

    Sure, in the creative commons, you may have to acknoledge the original owner, or have less restrictions (more difficult to make money from your work).

    BUT ITS THE SAME THING, mabey with a little lipstick stuck on, but really Copyright and CC and much of one and the same.

    And trying to register something as yours that is not yours, is a crime, no matter what it is, no matter if its claiming it under the CC, or copyright or whatever.

    If its not yours to start with, you are breaking the law, and rules and you are making the system (FAR) less effective.

    again, start polluting the Creative Commons with copyright material and you will end up with problems that will render the CC totally ineffective..

    And im sure that is not what you want, and if you were really open and free you would place your work in the public domain, and not the creative commons.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Show Now: Takedown
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.