Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Consumer Law Blogs -> 43(B)log

Consumer Law

: 43(B)log

modifying a CC license

By Rebecca Tushnet

Lucas Hilderbrand, Inherent Vice: Bootleg Histories of Videotape and Copyright

A good read, but right now I want to talk about the copyright statement, which has a few things going on. It reads: ?© 2009 Duke University Press, All rights reserved?. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License ?. ?NonCommercial? as defined in this license specifically excludes any sale of this work or any portion thereof for money, even if the sale does not result in a profit by the seller or if the sale is by a 501(c)(3) nonprofit or NGO.?

I found this variation?for it is, I think, a variation on the CC license, with all that means for standardization?on a few other books, Ian Condry, Hip-Hop Japan: Rap and the Paths of Cultural Globalization (Duke) (which despite the license was not, as far as I could find, available for download, and was only previewed on Google Books), Christopher Kelty?s Two Bits: The Cultural Significance of Free Software (also Duke) and Ted Striphas?s The Late Age of Print: Everyday Book Culture from Consumerism to Control (Columbia). It may well be on others that didn?t turn up in my search.

The meaning of noncommercial, of course, is hotly debated in the CC community. Is this addendum a bit of norm entrepreneurship? A fragmentation of the license that makes it less-than-machine-readable? And how are we supposed to understand ?all rights reserved? other than as contradiction?

Full post as published by 43(B)log on May 22, 2010 (boomark / email).