# Creative Commons for Educators and Librarians/Chapter 3

3
Anatomy of a CC License
Creative Commons licenses give everyone from individual creators to large companies and institutions a clear, standardized way to grant permission to others to use their creative work. From the reuser’s perspective, the presence of a Creative Commons license answers the question, “What can I do with this?” and provides the freedom to reuse the work of others, subject to clearly defined conditions.
All CC licenses ensure that creators retain their copyright and get credit for their work, while still permitting others to copy and distribute it. Although the CC legal tools are designed to be as easy to use as possible, there are still some things to learn in order to fully understand their mechanics.
This chapter has five sections:
* License Design and Terminology
* License Scope
* License Types
* License Enforceability
* Additional Resources
3.1 | LICENSE DESIGN AND TERMINOLOGY Do you “speak CC” yet? This section covers the acronyms, terms, and icons used in connection with Creative Commons’ tools, as well as some key things to know about how the licenses were designed.
* Differentiate the meaning of different CC icons
* Identify the three layers of CC licenses
THE BIG QUESTION: WHY IT MATTERS Given that most of us are not lawyers, what do we need to know about the legalities in order to use CC licenses properly?
Creative Commons’ legal tools were designed to be as accessible to everyone as possible while still being legally robust. CC’s founders made several design decisions that make these legal tools relatively easy to use and understand.
PERSONAL REFLECTION: WHY IT MATTERS TO YOU Have you ever come across a CC-licensed Flickr image that you really liked but were afraid to use because you weren’t sure of the legal terms and conditions? Have you ever been frustrated because you didn’t understand how to decide which of the CC legal tools to use for your own work?
Acquiring Essential Knowledge Copyright operates by default under an “all rights reserved” approach. Creative Commons licenses function within copyright law, but they utilize a “some rights reserved” approach. While there are several different CC license options, all of them grant permission to use the works under certain standardized conditions. The licenses grant those permissions for as long as the underlying copyright lasts or until/unless you violate the license terms. This is what we mean when we say CC licenses work on top of copyright, not instead of copyright.
The CC licenses were designed to be a free, voluntary solution for creators who want to grant the public up-front permission to use their works. Although the licenses are legally enforceable tools, they were designed in a way that was intended to make them accessible to non-lawyers.
The licenses are built using a three-layer design (figure 3.1).
* The legal code is the base layer. This contains the “lawyer-readable” terms and conditions that are legally enforceable in court. Take a minute and scan through the legal code of CC BY (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode) to see how it is structured. Can you find where the attribution requirements are listed?
* The commons deeds are the best-known layer of the licenses. These are the web pages that lay out the key license terms in “human​readable” terms. The deeds are not legally enforceable but instead summarize the legal code. Take some time to explore the deeds for CC BY (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) and CC BY-NC-ND (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) and identify how they differ. Can you find the links to the legal code from each deed? FIGURE 3.1 The three layers of a CC license'
| Have a web page? This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Copy this code to let your visitors know! <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ "><img alt="Creative Commons License" style="border-width:0" src="https://i.creativecommons.org/l/by/4.0/88x31. | FIGURE 3.2 Example of “machine readable” code From Creative Commons License Chooser: https://creativecommons.org/choose/ CC BY 4.0 |
All Creative Commons licenses have many important features in common. At a minimum, every license helps creators (we call them “licensors” when they use CC tools) retain copyright while allowing others to copy and distribute their work. Every CC license also ensures that licensors get credit for their work. CC licenses work around the world and last as long as the applicable copyright lasts (because they are built on copyright) and as long as the user complies with the license. These common features serve as the baseline, on top of which licensors can choose to grant additional permissions when deciding how they want their work to be used.
! NOTE Throughout all of the CC Certificate content, please assume that all descriptions of the licenses refer to the most recent version of the CC license suite, Version 4.0, unless otherwise indicated. You will learn more about the different versions in section 3.3 “License Types.”
CHOICES FOR THE LICENSOR All Creative Commons licenses are structured to give the user permission to make a wide range of uses as long as the user complies with the conditions in the license. The basic condition in all of the licenses is that the user provides credit to the licensor and certain other information, such as where the original work may be found.
A CC licensor makes a few simple decisions on the path to choosing a license: first, do I want to allow commercial use of my work; and second, do I want to allow derivative works (also known as adaptations)? We’ll address adaptations in greater detail within chapter 4.
If a licensor decides to allow derivative works, they may also choose to require that anyone who uses the work—we call them “licensees”—make their new work available under the same license terms. This is what is meant by “ShareAlike,” and it is one of the mechanisms that has helped the digital commons of CC-licensed content grow over time. ShareAlike is inspired by the GNU General Public License, which is used by many free and open-source software projects.
These different license elements are symbolized by visual icons, as shown in figures 3.3a to 3.3d below.
The symbol shown in figure 3.3a means Attribution or “BY.” This license means that others who use your work must give you credit for it (i. e., attribute it to you) in the way you request. All of the licenses include this condition. ​
| a | b |
| c | d |
FIGURES 3.3 A–D Different license elements
The symbol shown in figure 3.3b means NonCommercial or “NC,” which means the work is only available to be used for non-commercial purposes. Three of the CC licenses include this restriction.
The symbol shown in figure 3.3c means ShareAlike or “SA,” which means that any adaptations and modified versions based on this work must adhere to the terms of the original license. Two of the CC licenses include this condition: Attribution-ShareAlike (CC BY-SA), and Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike (CC BY-NC-SA).
The symbol shown in figure 3.3d means NoDerivatives or “ND,” which means that reusers cannot share adaptations or modified versions of the work. Two of the CC licenses include this restriction: Attribution-NoDerivs (CC BY-ND), and Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND).
When combined, these icons represent the six CC license options. The icons are also embedded in the “license icons,” which each represent a particular CC license type. The next section in this chapter, “License Types,” explores the six combinations in detail. ​
| a | b |
FIGURE 3.4A CC0 FIGURE 3.4B Public Domain Mark
PUBLIC DOMAIN TOOLS In addition to the CC license suite, Creative Commons also has two public domain tools, which are represented by the icons in figures 3.4a and 3.4b above. These public domain tools are not licenses.
CC0 (figure 3.4a) enables creators to dedicate their works to the worldwide public domain to the greatest extent possible. Note that some jurisdictions do not allow creators to dedicate their works to the public domain, so CC0 has other legal mechanisms included to help deal with this situation where it applies. (There is more on this in section 3.3 “License Types.”)
The Public Domain Mark (figure 3.4b) is a label used to mark works that are known to be free of all copyright restrictions. Unlike CC0, the Public Domain Mark is not a legal tool and has no legal effect when applied to a work. It serves only as a label to inform the public about the public domain status of a work and is often used by museums and archives working with very old works.
Final Remarks There is a learning curve to some of the terminology and basics about how CC legal tools work. But as you now know, it is far less intimidating than it looks. Now that you understand how to “speak CC” and know some of the fundamentals about CC license design, you are well on your way to becoming versed in CC licensing.
Creative Commons licenses are built on copyright law. This simple fact tells you most of what you need to know about when they do and do not apply, and how long they last.
LEARNING OUTCOMES
* Describe how CC works with copyright and why this is important
* Explain the time length of a CC license
THE BIG QUESTION: WHY IT MATTERS What is the legal foundation upon which CC licenses operate? And why is this so important?
CC licenses are copyright licenses. They apply where and when copyright applies. This reflects a fundamental design decision by the founders of Creative Commons. Given that the goal was to make more creative and educational works available under common-sense terms, Creative Commons wanted to ensure that its licenses were not used to restrict works or uses of works that the copyright law does not restrict. This is a core CC value. Having the language of the licenses track copyright law accomplished this goal.
PERSONAL REFLECTION: WHY IT MATTERS TO YOU Think about what it would mean if a CC license could prevent you from doing something you could otherwise do with a copyrighted work, such as printing a copy of a poem to insert in a birthday card for a friend. Do you understand why having CC licenses track copyright was an important decision for the founders of Creative Commons?
Acquiring Essential Knowledge The statement that “Creative Commons licenses are copyright licenses” tells you the following about the licenses:
* The licenses “operate” or apply only when the work is within the scope of copyright law (or other related laws) and the restrictions of copyright law apply to the intended use of the work. (This is discussed in more detail below.)
* Certain other rights, such as patents, trademarks, and privacy and publicity rights are not covered by the licenses and must be managed separately.
​The first of these statements explains a basic limitation of the licenses in controlling what people do with the work, and the second statement provides a warning that there may be other rights at play with the work that restrict how it is used.
WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR THE CC LICENSE TO APPLY WHERE COPYRIGHT APPLIES? CC licenses are appropriate for creators who have created something protectable by copyright, such as an image, an article, or a book, and who want to provide people with one or more of the permissions governed by copyright law. For example, if you want to give others permission to freely copy and redistribute your work, you can use a CC license to grant those permissions. Likewise, if you want to give others permission to freely transform, alter, or otherwise create derivative works based on your work, you can use a CC license to grant those permissions.
However, you don’t need to use a Creative Commons license to give someone permission to read your article or watch your video, because reading and watching aren’t activities that copyright generally regulates.
Here are two more important scenarios in which a user does not need a copyright license:
* When fair use, fair dealing, or some other limitation and exception to copyright applies (see the relevant FAQ at https://creativecommons.org/faq/#do-creative-commons-licenses-affect-exceptions-and-limitations-to-copyright-such-as-fair-dealing-and-fair-use).
* When the work is in the public domain (see the relevant FAQ at https://creativecommons.org/faq/#may-i-apply-a-creative-commons-license-to-a-work-in-the-public-domain).
BECAUSE USERS DON’T NEED COPYRIGHT LICENSES IN THESE SCENARIOS, CC LICENSES AREN’T NEEDED Can you think of reasons why someone might try to apply a CC license to a work that is not covered by copyright in their own country? Or reasons why a CC licensor might expect attribution every time their work is used, even for a use that is not prohibited by copyright law?
These users might be trying to exert control that they do not actually have by law. But more likely than not, they simply don’t know that copyright does ​not apply, or that a work is in the public domain. Or, for the savvy licensor, they may realize that their work is in the public domain in some countries but not everywhere, and they want to be sure that everyone everywhere will be able to reuse it.
For a real-life example, let’s look at what happens when you want to use CC licenses in a field like 3D printing. Look at the resource provided by Public Knowledge (licensed CC BY-SA 3.0, available at https://www.publicknowledge.org/assets/uploads/documents/3_Steps_for_Licensing_Your_3D_Printed_Stuff.pdf) about how to apply a CC license in the 3D printing field. It is easy to see how complicated the legal issues can become, particularly in newly emerging fields like this one.
One other subtle but important difference about the scope of CC licenses is that they also cover other rights that are closely related to copyright. These are defined as “Similar Rights” in the CC license legal code, and they include related and neighboring rights and what are known as “sui genesis database rights,” which are rights in some countries restricting the extraction and reuse of the contents of a database. See section 2.1 “Copyright Basics” for a refresher on what Similar Rights covers. Just as with copyright, the CC license conditions only come into play when Similar Rights otherwise apply to the work and to the particular reuse made by someone using the CC-licensed work.
The other critical part of the statement “CC licenses are copyright licenses” is that there may be other rights in a work upon which the license has no effect—for example, privacy rights. Again, CC licenses do not have any effect on rights beyond copyright and Similar Rights as defined in the licenses, so other rights have to be managed separately. Read the FAQ about this issue at https://creativecommons.org/faq/#does-a-creative-commons-license-give-me-all-the-rights-i-need-to-use-the-work.
While it is not required, Creative Commons urges creators to make sure that there are no other rights that may prevent the reuse of their work as intended. CC licensors do not make any warranties about the reuse of the work. This means that unless the licensor is offering a separate warranty, it is incumbent on the reuser to determine whether other rights may impact their intended reuse of the work. Learning more about this can sometimes be as easy as contacting the licensor to inquire about these possible other rights. Read through the complete list of considerations for licensees of CC-licensed works, licensed CC BY 4.0, at https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/Considerations_for_licensors_and_licensees#Considerations_for_licensees.
You can apply a CC license to anything protected by copyright that you own, with one important exception.
CC urges creators not to apply CC licenses to software. This is because there are many free and open-source software licenses which do that job better; they were built specifically as software licenses. For example, most open-source software licenses include provisions about distributing the software’s source code—but the CC licenses do not address this important aspect of sharing software. The software-sharing ecosystem is well established, and there are many good open-source software licenses to choose from. An FAQ from Creative Commons’ website available at https://creativecommons.org/faq/#can-i-apply-a-creative-commons-license-to-software has more information about why we discourage the use of our licenses for software.
WHOSE RIGHTS ARE COVERED BY THE CC LICENSE? A CC license on a given work only covers the copyright held by the person who applied the license—the licensor. This might sound obvious, but it is an important point to understand. For example, many employers own the copyright to works created by their employees, so if an employee applies a CC license to a work owned by their employer, they are not able to give any permission whatsoever to reuse the work. The person who applies the license needs to be either the creator or someone who has acquired the rights to the work.
Additionally, a work may incorporate the copyrighted work of another, such as a scholarly article that uses a copyrighted photograph to illustrate an idea (after having received the permission of the owner of the photograph to include it). The CC license applied by the author of the scholarly article does not apply to the photograph, only to the remainder of the work. Separate permission may need to be obtained in order to reproduce the photograph (but not the remainder of the article). See section 3.4 “License Enforceability” for more details on how to handle these situations.
Also, works often have more than one copyright attached to them. For example, a filmmaker may own the copyright to a film adaptation of a book, but the book author also holds a copyright to the book on which the film is based. In this example, if the film is CC-licensed, the CC license only applies to the film and not the book. The user may need to separately obtain a license to use the copyrightable content from the book that is part of the film.
A key to understanding how Creative Commons works is understanding that the licenses depend on copyright to function. This seemingly simple concept explains a lot about when the tools apply and how much of a work they cover.
3.3 | LICENSE TYPES There are six different CC licenses, which are designed to help accommodate the diverse needs of creators while still using simple, standardized terms.
LEARNING OUTCOMES
* Explain the CC license suite
* Describe the different CC license elements
THE BIG QUESTION: WHY IT MATTERS Why are there so many different Creative Commons licenses?
There is no single Creative Commons license. The CC license suite (which includes the six CC licenses) and the CC0 Public Domain Dedication offer creators a range of options. At first, all of these choices can appear daunting. But when you dig into the options, you will realize that the spectrum of choices is fairly simple.
PERSONAL REFLECTION: WHY IT MATTERS TO YOU Think about a piece of creative or academic work you made that you are particularly proud of. If you shared that work with others, would you have been okay with them adapting it or using it for commercial purposes? Why or why not?
Acquiring Essential Knowledge Creative Commons licenses are standardized tools, but part of the vision is to provide a range of options for creators who are interested in sharing their works with the public rather than reserving all rights under copyright.
The four license elements—BY, SA, NC, and ND—combine to make up six different license options.
All of the licenses include the BY condition. In other words, all of the licenses require that the creator be attributed in connection with their work. Beyond that commonality, the licenses vary as to whether (1) commercial use of the work is permitted, and (2) whether the work can be adapted or modified, and if so, on what terms. ​
| a | d |
| b | e |
| c | f |
FIGURES 3.5 a–f The six BY licenses
The six licenses, from least to most restrictive in terms of the freedoms granted reusers, are shown in figures 3.5a to 3.5f.
The Attribution license, or CC BY (figure 3.5a), allows people to use the work for any purpose (even commercially and even in modified form) as long as they give attribution to the creator.
The Attribution-ShareAlike license, or BY-SA (figure 3.5b), allows people to use the work for any purpose (even commercially and even in modified form), as long as they give attribution to the creator and make any adaptations they share with others available under the same or a compatible license. This is Creative Commons’ version of a copyleft license (a type of open source software license that makes the license permissions viral by design), and is the license required for the content uploaded to Wikipedia, for example.
The Attribution-NonCommercial license, or BY-NC (figure 3.5c), allows people to use the work for noncommercial purposes only, and only as long as they give attribution to the creator.
The Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike license, or BY-NC-SA (figure 3.5d), allows people to use the work for noncommercial purposes only, and only as long as they give attribution to the creator and make any adaptations they share with others available under the same or a compatible license.
​The Attribution-NoDerivatives license, or BY-ND (figure 3.5e), allows people to use the unadapted work for any purpose (even commercially), as long as they give attribution to the creator. But they cannot use adapted or modified versions of the work (these are called “derivatives”).
The Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license, or BY-NC-ND (figure 3.5f), is the most restrictive license offered by Creative Commons. It allows people to use the unadapted work for noncommercial purposes only, and only as long as they give attribution to the licensor. Adaptations or modified versions of the work are not permitted.
To really understand how the different license options work, let’s dig into the different license elements. Attribution is a part of all CC licenses, and we will dissect exactly what type of attribution is required in chapter 4. For now, let’s focus on what makes the licenses different.
Noncommercial (NC) As we know, three of the licenses (BY-NC, BY-NC-SA, and BY-NC-ND) limit reuse of the work to noncommercial purposes only. In the legal code, a noncommercial purpose is defined as one that is “not primarily intended for or directed towards commercial advantage or monetary compensation.” This phrasing is intended to provide flexibility depending on the facts surrounding the reuse, without overly specifying exact situations that could exclude some prohibited and some permitted reuses.
It is important to note that CC’s definition of NC depends on the use, not the user. If you are a nonprofit or charitable organization, your use of an NC-licensed work could still run afoul of the NC restriction, and if you are a for-profit entity, your use of an NC-licensed work does not necessarily mean you have violated the license terms. For example, a nonprofit entity cannot sell another’s NC-licensed work for a profit, and a for-profit entity may use an NC-licensed work for noncommercial purposes. Whether a use is commercial depends on the specifics of the situation. See our CC “NonCommercial Interpretation” page, licensed CC BY 4.0, at https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/NonCommercial_interpretation for more information and examples.
The other differences between the licenses hinge on whether, and on what terms, reusers can adapt and then share the licensed work. The question of what constitutes an adaptation of a licensed work depends on applicable copyright law (for a reminder, see chapter 2). One of the exclusive rights granted to creators under copyright is the right to create adaptations or modified versions of their works or, as they are sometimes called, “derivative works.” Examples of these adaptations include creating a movie based on a book or translating a book from one language to another.
As a legal matter, at times it is tricky to determine exactly what is and is not an adaptation. Here are some handy rules about the licenses to keep in mind:
Technical format-shifting (for example, converting a licensed work from a digital format to a physical copy) is not an adaptation regardless of what the applicable copyright law may otherwise provide.
* Fixing minor problems with spelling or punctuation is not an adaptation.
* Syncing a musical work with a moving image is an adaptation regardless of what the applicable copyright law may otherwise provide.
* Reproducing and putting works together into a collection is not an adaptation of the individual works. For example, combining stand-alone essays by several authors into an essay collection for use as an open textbook is a collection and not an adaptation. Most open courseware is a collection of others’ open educational resources (OER).
* Including an image in connection with text, as in a blog post, a PowerPoint, or an article, does not create an adaptation unless the photo itself is adapted.
Two of the CC licenses (BY-ND and BY-NC-ND) prohibit reusers from sharing (i. e., distributing or making available) adaptations of the licensed work. To be clear, this means that anyone may create adaptations of works under an ND license so long as they don’t share the work with others in adapted form. This allows, among other things, organizations to engage in text and data mining without violating the ND term.
Two of the licenses (BY-SA and BY-NC-SA) require that if adaptations of the licensed work are shared, they must be made available under the same or a compatible license. For ShareAlike purposes, the list of compatible licenses is short. It includes later versions of the same license (e .g., BY-SA 4.0 is compatible with BY-SA 3.0) and a few non-CC licenses designated as compatible by Creative Commons (e. g., the Free Art License). You can read more about this at the CC wiki ShareAlike Compatibility page, licensed CC BY 4.0, available at https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/ShareAlike_compatibility, but the most important thing to remember is that ShareAlike requires that if you share your adaptation, you must do so using the same or a compatible license.
In addition to the CC license suite, Creative Commons also has an option for creators who want to take a “no rights reserved” approach and disclaim copyright entirely. This is CC0, the Public Domain Dedication tool.
Like the CC licenses, CC0 (read “CC Zero”) uses the three-layer design—legal code, deed, and metadata. The CC0 legal code itself uses a three-pronged legal approach. The first approach is for the creator to simply waive all of their rights to the work. But some countries do not allow creators to dedicate their work to the public domain through a waiver or abandonment of their rights, so CC0 includes a “fallback” license that allows anyone in the world to do anything with the work unconditionally. The fallback license comes into play when the waiver fails for any reason. And finally, in the rare instance that both the waiver and the “fallback” license are not enforceable, CC includes a promise by the person applying CC0 to their work that they will not assert copyright against reusers in a manner that interferes with their stated intention of surrendering all rights in the work.
Like the licenses, CC0 is a copyright tool, but it also covers a few additional rights beyond those covered by the CC licenses, such as noncompetition laws. From a reuse perspective, there still may be other rights that require clearance separately, such as trademark and patent rights, and third-party rights in the work, such as publicity or privacy rights.
Creative Commons legal tools were designed to provide a solution to complicated laws in a standardized way, making them as easy as possible for non-lawyers to use and apply. Understanding the basic legal principles in this section will help you use the CC licenses and public domain tools more effectively.
3.4 | LICENSE ENFORCEABILITY Creative Commons licenses have been carefully crafted to make them legally enforceable in countries around the world.
LEARNING OUTCOMES
* Describe the state of Creative Commons case law
* Explain the potential benefits of seeking nonlegal resolutions to disagreements
THE BIG QUESTION: WHY IT MATTERS Creative Commons licenses are legal tools that build on copyright law. As legal instruments, CC licenses need to stand up in court. What happens when there is a court case that involves CC licenses? What happens if someone is violating the CC license you applied to a work, but you don’t want to file a lawsuit? What happens if a licensor complains about how you have attributed them when reusing their work?
To date and to our knowledge, no court around the world that has heard a case involving a CC license (and there have been very few such cases) has questioned the validity or enforceability of a CC license. Thanks to the Creative Commons community, most disputes connected to CC licenses are resolved outside of court and often without involving lawyers.
PERSONAL REFLECTION: WHY IT MATTERS TO YOU Whether you or your organization are using CC licenses, or you’re advising others in the use of such licenses, you want to be confident that the terms of those licenses are enforceable. If someone misuses your work, what recourse do you have? What would you do if you found out that someone was using your CC-licensed photograph in a magazine without giving you credit, for example?
Most people who reuse CC-licensed works try to comply with the license conditions. But whether well-meaning or not, sometimes people get it wrong.
If someone is using a CC-licensed work without giving attribution or otherwise following the license, their right to use the work ends automatically as soon as they violate the license terms. Unless the person using the work received separate permission or is relying upon fair use or some other exception to copyright, they are potentially liable for copyright infringement. To learn what happens when someone does not comply with a CC license, read the FAQ at https://creativecommons.org/faq/#what-happens-if-i-offer-my-material-under-a-creative-commons-license-and-someone-misuses-them. For a look at what happens from the perspective of a reuser, read the FAQ at https://creativecommons.org/faq/#how-can-i-lose-my-rights-under-a-creative-commons-license-if-that-happens-how-do-i-get-them-back.
Note this important difference between the newest version of CC licenses (Version 4.0) and prior versions in the text box below:
30-day window to correct license violations
All CC licenses terminate when a licensee breaks their terms, but under 4.0, a licensee’s rights are reinstated automatically if she corrects a breach within 30 days of discovering it. The cure period in version 4.0 resembles similar provisions in some other public licenses and better reflects how licensors and licensees resolve compliance issues in practice. It also assures users that provided they act promptly, they can continue using the CC-licensed work without worry that they may have lost their rights permanently.
Under Version 4.0, users of CC-licensed works who come into compliance with license terms within thirty days of discovering they were in violation of the terms have their rights under the license automatically reinstated.
FIGURE 3.6 What’s new in Version 4.0 of the CC licenses?
From the “What’s New in 4.0 Page” on the Creative Commons website: https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/licensing-considerations/version4/ CC BY 4.0
Sometimes these types of disputes can end up in court. Over the course of Creative Commons’ history, to our knowledge, there have been very few legal disputes and decisions involving CC legal tools. Each court that has rendered a decision has made it without questioning the enforceability of the CC license at issue.
​Those judicial decisions have been in a variety of places around the world, including Spain, Belgium, Netherlands, Germany, Sweden, Israel, and the United States. Creative Commons maintains a listing of court decisions and case law from jurisdictions around the world on its wiki, licensed CC BY 4.0, available at https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/Case_Law.
In all of these decisions, no court has questioned the validity of a CC license in the case. While a CC license played a minor role in some of the cases, in others the court has held the defendant liable for copyright infringement for failing to follow the CC license terms. You can read about one such decision at the CC wiki page Curry v. Audax, licensed CC BY 4.0 and available at https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/Curry_v._Audax.
Legal enforceability is one of the key features of CC licensing. While the licenses are widely seen as symbols of free and open sharing, they also carry legal weight. The CC legal code was written by lawyers with the help of a global network of international copyright experts. The result is a set of terms and conditions that are intended to operate and be enforceable everywhere in the world.
LICENSE VERSIONS As noted above, there are different versions of CC licenses. These are not to be confused with the different types of licenses described in [[{{{work}}}|section 3.3#3.3]]. The license version number simply represents when that particular version of the CC legal code was written. Creative Commons improves its licenses through the process of versioning, by which we update the legal code to better account for changes in copyright law and technology, and the needs of reusers. While there are some differences between license versions, the different versions are largely the same in practical effect. The latest version of the CC license suite is Version 4.0, which was published in 2013. Details on what updates were made to the licenses in Version 4.0 can be found at https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/licensing-considerations/version4. For the most definitive and com­prehensive view of how the licenses have changed from Version 1.0 to the present, including all changes to the attribution and marking requirements, visit the CC wiki page, licensed CC BY 4.0, available at https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/License_Versions.
In all cases, we recommend that creators use the latest version of the licenses, because it reflects the latest thinking of Creative Commons and its global network of legal experts.
The latest versions of all the CC licenses (and other tools) may be translated into official versions in other languages. Creative Commons has a formal process (see the Legal Code Translation Policy, licensed CC BY 4.0 and available at https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/Legal_Code_Translation_Policy) by which this is done in order to ensure that the translations are as close to the original as possible. Creative Commons’ goal is to get the licenses into as many languages as possible, so that everyone can read and understand the terms in their native language. The official translations are noted at the bottom of the legal code on all of the licenses and are equivalents of one another.
Many people ask about the relationship between the official translations and the English originals. All official translations are linguistic translations only, unlike ported versions (which are described in the text box below). The official translations are legal equivalents of one another, which means they have the same legal meaning and effect in each language. This is similar to how standards bodies such as the World Wide Web Consortium translate a single standard into many different languages, and how the United Nations publishes treaties.
RESOLVING DISPUTES Since the publication of Version 1.0 of the licenses in 2002, Creative Commons is aware of a relatively small number of disputes between licensors and reusers over its licenses, including the NonCommercial term and attribution. There may be several explanations for this state of harmony. As observed by Creative Commons in its “Defining ‘Noncommercial’” report (licensed CC BY 3.0 and
Distinguishing ported versions of the pre-4.0 versions of the CC licenses.
Prior to the publication of Version 4.0 in November 2013, Creative Commons gave permission to the CC Global Network to “port” the Creative Commons licenses. Porting involved linguistic translation and adjustments so that the licenses reflected local terminology and drafting protocols, and it accounted for other local differences, such as the existence of moral rights and collecting societies.
One of the primary reasons for versioning the licenses from 3.0 to 4.0 was to eliminate the need for porting, an unnecessarily complex process that could be eliminated if Creative Commons took proper care to ensure that the new licenses were internationalized. Starting with Version 4.0, the most recent version of the CC license suite, Creative Commons no longer “ports” the licenses. The ported licenses of previous versions may still be used and remain legally valid and enforceable; however, Creative Commons discourages their use and recommends Version 4.0 as the latest and most up-to-date thinking of CC and its global network.
Note that Creative Commons accounted for this practice in Version 4.0. Whereas prior to 4.0, any violation of the license automatically terminated the license, and the violator had to seek new and express permission from the licensor to reuse the work again, in Version 4.0, the license automatically reinstates if the violator corrects the problem within thirty days of having become aware of it. This encourages reusers to do the right thing—correct their violations as soon as possible upon discovery, whether or not the licensor has made a claim. This can help avoid disputes.
In many ways, both of these practices—being more generous and respectful, and outreach to solve any perceived violations—are a testament to the values held and practiced by the CC community of creators and reusers. Creative Commons encourages healthy, open interactions between licensors and those reusing their works.
Final Remarks The legal robustness of the CC licenses is critically important. With the help of an international network of legal and policy experts, the CC licenses are accepted and enforceable worldwide. To date, no court has declared the licenses unenforceable, and very few lawsuits have ensued. In the vast majority of cases, the CC community has resolved any disputes outside of the courtroom.
* “About the Open Publication License,” by David Wiley. CC BY 4.0.
    A brief history that outlines open content licensing and why the licenses were eventually replaced by the more robust Creative Commons licenses: http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/329.
* “Creative Commons License,” Wikipedia article. CC BY-SA 3.0.
    This Wikipedia article explains the CC licenses and some use instructions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_Commons_license.
* “About the Licenses,” by Creative Commons. CC BY 4.0.
    To read all of the CC license deeds and legal codes, visit this site and explore the different licenses: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/.
Selected Frequently Asked Questions by Creative Commons (CC BY 4.0)
* Do Creative Commons licenses affect the exceptions and limitations to copyright, such as fair dealing and fair use? See https://creativecommons.org/faq/#do-creative-commons-licenses-affect-exceptions-and-limitations-to-copyright-such-as-fair-dealing-and-fair-use.
* May I apply a Creative Commons license to a work in the public domain? See https://creativecommons.org/faq/#may-i-apply-a-creative-commons-license-to-a-work-in-the-public-domain.
* What happens if I offer my material under a Creative Commons license and someone misuses that material? See https://creativecommons.org/faq/#what-happens-if-i-offer-my-material-under-a-creative-commons-license-and-someone-misuses-them.
* How can I lose my rights under a Creative Commons license? If that happens, how do I get them back? See https://creativecommons.org/faq/#how-can-i-lose-my-rights-under-a-creative-commons-license-if-that-happens-how-do-i-get-them-back.
Participants’ Recommended Resources CC Certificate participants have recommended many additional resources through Hypothes.is annotations on the Certificate website. While Creative Commons has not vetted these resources, we wanted to highlight participants’ ​suggestions here: https://certificates.creativecommons.org/cccerteducomments/chapter/additional-resources-3/.
NOTE