An Easy Way to Protect Your Intellectual Property
Summary: One question I get on a regular basis is from companies wondering how to get the maximum exposure for their white papers and other material but not loose complete control over their intellectual property. In this free-wheeling time, if you place too many restrictions on your Web-based material, no one will quote from it or pick it up in various blogs and other sites (which is often the point).
One question I get on a regular basis is from companies wondering how to get the maximum exposure for their white papers and other material but not loose complete control over their intellectual property. In this free-wheeling time, if you place too many restrictions on your Web-based material, no one will quote from it or pick it up in various blogs and other sites (which is often the point).
So Doc is a big fan of the nonprofit Creative Commons folks, who provide an open and cost-free way to establish copyright and clearly define what others can do with your material.
Creative Commons is dedicated to making it easier for people to share and build upon the work of others, consistent with the rules of copyright. They provide free licenses and other legal tools to mark creative work with the freedom the creator wants it to carry so that others can share it, remix it, use it commercially, or any combination thereof.
The following describes each of the six main licenses offered when you choose to publish your work with a Creative Commons license. They items are listed starting with the most accommodating license type you can choose and ending with the most restrictive license type you can choose:
- Attribution. This license lets others distribute, remix, tweak, and build upon your work—even commercially—as long as they credit you for the original creation. This is the most accommodating of licenses offered in terms of what others can do with your work licensed under Attribution.
- Attribution Share Alike. This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work even for commercial reasons as long as they credit you and license their new creations under the identical terms. This license is often compared to open source software licenses. All new works based on yours will carry the same license, so any derivatives will also allow commercial use.
- Attribution No Derivatives. This license allows for redistribution—both commercial and noncommercial—as long as it is passed along unchanged and whole, with credit to you.
- Attribution Non-Commercial. This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially. And although their new works must also acknowledge you and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.
- Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike. This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, as long as they credit you and license their new creations under the identical terms. Others can download and redistribute your work just as the by-nc-nd license, but they can also translate, make remixes, and produce new stories based on your work. All new work based on yours will carry the same license, so any derivatives will also be non-commercial in nature.
- Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives. This license is the most restrictive of our six main licenses, allowing redistribution. This license is often called the free advertising license, because it allows others to download your works and share them with others as long as they mention you and link back to you, but they can’t change them in any way or use them commercially.
Doc thinks that you should consider a Creative Commons license for much of your work—perhaps even your entire Web site. It says to the world that you are willing to share your content freely as long as it is shown certain respect and credit.
More from “The DocuMentor”
Topics
Biography
Doc
ZDNet introduces Doc (The DocuMentor), sponsored by RICOH. Through his blog, Doc will educate you about Document Management. So who is Doc? Doc is something of an enigma. He was born to a Russian ballerina and a German electrical engineer who some believe was running covert operations for shadowy corporate interests. Doc grew up in various locations in the United States, although no one seems to know precisely where, least of all Doc. His early schooling was unremarkable except for the time he was caught trying to replace all the mimeograph machines with high-tech color copiers that had mysteriously disappeared from a shipment to Albania. At MIT, he made a name for himself by transforming a large printer into a robot that hunts and eats Roombas. Professionally, he reportedly has seen the insides of more brands, versions, and generations of printer and printer-related hardware than almost anyone. Some say his obsession with paper, printing, and mechanical movement was either started by, or evidenced by, a traumatic childhood episode when he crawled inside an old Xerox 2400 and tried to print himself.
Anyway, Doc has hands on experience with stuff like printer maintenance and fleet management, but his mastery of document management leaves no stone unturned. Important issues like sustainability, security, and regulatory compliance are top of mind for Doc, as are other business technology needs like networking and IT services, making him a true blue IT renaissance man.
Just In
replica hermes bags hermes bags replica hermes 
Bruce Lamar Rosenberg
IMHO, I would think it would depend upon the work. I certainly wouldn't want my photos (which are currently under a commercial license) to fall under Creative Commons.
Currently, anything that is created in the US falls under US copyright law as it is, and can be managed within that law for now. If I don't want someone to use it without my permission, I can stop it; if I want to be able to get damages for the unauthorized use, all I have to do is pay the government $40, and I can do that after the fact (just before filing a suit).
Creative Commons, from my understanding, is also called the "copyleft movement", which feels that people should be able to make a derivative if they want. Because of the extra confusion Creative Commons is making in the already confusing copyright law, Graphics pirates are citing Creative Commons as their "right" to take copyrighted work without paying for it. (As if a pirate needs a justification to take something without paying for it.)
Creative Commons might work for open source software, but it's giving the graphics community, and those that create actual copyrighted work, a huge headache.
We cannot have all these different laws on the same item. I know that it's time for the Copyright, Trademark, and Patent laws to be brought into the 20th (yes, 20th) century, but does it need something like Creative Commons, which is a part of a non-governmental venture, to do it? How can they enforce a violation if their rules aren't laws?
that the US government did not consider this
true copyright"
How about you go over to the Creative Commons
website see what it's actually about
(http://wiki.creativecommons.org/FAQ ) wherever
you "heard" this is completely false. The CC
license is built on top of the copyright system-
it is meant to augment it, not replace it.
Listening to hearsay is not a good idea,
especially when you can go to the source.
Using the NC (non-commercial) attribute protects
a work from being commercially used without
permission from the copyright holder- yes, the
person that licenses their work under the CC
still holds the copyright (with all the
mechanisms available within that system),
they've simply added a license to allow certain
uses while restricting others.
"Because of the extra confusion Creative Commons
is making in the already confusing copyright
law, Graphics pirates are citing Creative
Commons as their "right" to take copyrighted
work without paying for it."
Not even close, the CC license can only be
applied to a work by the person that owns the
copyright in the first place. There is no
confusion. You may be confusing this with Fair
Use- but that's a whole other kettle of fish.
"Creative Commons might work for open source
software"
No, that would be the GPL
(http://www.opensource.org/licenses/gpl-
license.php ), in fact it is not recommend to
use a CC license on software.
"it's giving the graphics community, and those
that create actual copyrighted work, a huge
headache."
The CC licenses have no effect whatsoever on
people that don't use them on their own works.
Plenty of poeple smarter than the paranoid Schizophrenics who are worried to death that someone will steal their valuable thoughts are willing to share their intellect anyway, so no need to steal it. Just look around, you'll see it everywhere.
A Brief Intro to Copyright
http://www.templetons.com/brad/copyright.html
10 Big Myths About Copyright Explained
http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html
More importantly, (Electronic Frontier Foundation: http://www.eff.org.
LOSE. The word is LOSE.
Join the conversation!
Quick Poll
Which imaging and document management trends are you most likely to consider?
Related Links
- New White paper: Managed Print Services and Beyond: How You Can Cut Costs and Go Green While Increasing Employee Productivity
- Learn how document management systems can help reduce the tide of paper that is swamping our offices
- Use software to cut costs by scrapping paper
- My printer, my social letterbox
- Doc on Twitter
- Doc on Facebook
- Doc on LinkedIn
Vendor Showcase
Blog Archive
White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
-
Office 365 Migration Guide: Approaches, Techniques and ChallengesNo Headache, No Hassles Microsoft 365 Migration
Your company is ... (Quest Software)Download Now - Seven Keys to Success in Managing Your Business-Critical CloudNeed a few tips on how to manage your cloud infrastructure? Here are seven ... (Hewlett-Packard (HP))Download Now
- The Best Ways to Migrate Lotus Notes Applications to SharePoint and Office 365Migrating Notes to SharePoint Online/Microsoft Office ... (Quest Software)Download Now
