A comprehensive review of creative commons

Creative Commons (CC), represents a movement towards “balance, compromise, and moderation” within copyright. Described by its proponents as a ‘some rights reserved’ copyright, CC introduces a number of licenses that allow creators to selectively use private rights to create public goods: creative works set free for certain uses. To fully understand CC, the context of the movement must first be understood, along with the way in which CC operates. The rationales behind CC can then be explored, leading to identification and understanding of the objectives CC purports to achieve. The impact of CC within a modern legal framework can then be assessed, taking into account both positive and negative outcomes. Analysis and understanding of these considerations can then form the premise of a decision as to whether CC should be embraced within the entertainment industry.

[...] Moreover, while the legal enforceability of the licenses is questioned by some, it must be noted that on the two occasions internationally where the licenses have come before the courts, they have been upheld.[44] The Negative Impact of Creative Commons While the idea behind a CC license is simple and effective, the logistical operation of the licenses is cause for concern. The main problem is that international consistency amongst public rights licenses is very difficult to achieve due to the “terminological differences between national copyright laws.”[45] The impact of such a conundrum is such that individual jurisdictions are somewhat deterred from creating licenses that facilitate ‘relationships’ with works from other jurisdictions.[46] This is further exacerbated by the fact that ideological differences exist between international licensing organizations within each jurisdiction.[47] Such a result has been described as “potentially fracturing the commons”[48], whereby any chance of a ‘sharing economy’ is quashed, along with the vision of CC. [...]

[...] B Fitzgerald, I Oi and V Tzimas, “Creative Commons in Australia” (2004) Internet Law Bulletin Flew, “Creative Commons and the creative industries” (2005) 10(4) Media and Arts Law Review M Fraser, “Copyleft in practice: issues and perspectives” (2006) 24(1&2) Copyright Reporter L Gordon-Murnane, “Generosity and copyright Creative Commons and Creative Commons Search Tools” 13(7) Searcher Hartnett New Era for Copyright Law: Reconstructing the Fair Use Doctrine” (1992) 39 Copyright Law Symposium 167 L Lessig, The Future of Ideas The fate of the commons in a connected world I McDonald, “Creative Commons: just say (2006) 24(4) Copyright Reporter J McKeough, A Stewart and P Griffith, Intellectual Property in Australia, (3rd ed, 2006) A Raskin, “Giving it Away (for Fun and Profit)” (2004) Business 2.0 R Sheftalovich, ”Protection of the Public Domain One of the Most Significant Challanges in the Law of Intellectual Property in the 21st Century”. [...]

[...] Such problems, however, cannot lead to the abolition of CC, as “none appear to be fatal, or a cause for rejecting, the CC licenses altogether.”[66] Possibly the most overlooked aspect of CC licensing is that it is not practical for all creative works. The potential impact of CC on many areas of the entertainment industry may seem gravely ominous, but in most cases, such criticism is derived from works that would clearly be inappropriately licensed under CC. CC acknowledges that there are some works for which CC licenses are more appropriate than others, conditional upon the “substance of the work, the objectives of the creator, and the wider context and significance of the work’s use and access.”[67] The issue of moral rights under CC is a very controversial and emotive issue, as it deals with issues relating to the control of the creator’s interests (or more correctly, lack thereof). [...]