Quote
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Stu:
The first is that the CC license is too new - so nobody knows the pitfalls or how Courts will interpret the rights.</font>


This is true. To my knowledge, CC licenses haven't been tested in the courts yet.

And of course, I'm not a lawyer and what follows is my own opinion of the license terms:

Aren't the warrantees neccessary to protect licensees in the event that the licensor slaps a CC license on a work they have no legal rights to? A hold harmless clause would allow anyone to slap a CC license on anything, no?

Section 5 states that the licensor must have obtained whatever rights and permissions necessary in order to legally license the work under a CC license.

Section 6 states that the licensor can be held liable if Section 5 is breached.

If I grab someone else's song and make it available under a CC license without first obtaining permission to do so, I'm violating the warranties in Section 5, therefore opening myself up to liability in Section 6.

Likewise, if I compose a song with samples from other people's work (like hip-hop track) and CC-license it without clearing the samples, I'm again violating Section 5.

Seems pretty clear to me, and necessary. It seems to me the risk is minimal so long as the licensor has obtained the needed rights to license the work under CC. Do you still disagree, Stu?

------------------
Scott Andrew
Lo-fi acoustic pop superhero!
http://www.scottandrew.com/music

[This message has been edited by scottandrew (edited 01-24-2006).]