Too Many Levels?

Our reflection question this week regards copyright licenses - are there too many levels. In Creative Commons (CC) alone there are 6 license types available on their license page. There is also confusion about what the terms mean within those license types. Non-commercial is a good example of this. Many of our readings/viewings this week mentioned the confusion surrounding non-commercial.

On the CC FAQ page non-commercial is describes as the restriction of works which are "primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation". CC goes on to explain that judging whether something is commercial or non-commercial will depend on both the situation and intention of the user. This makes the definition wide open for interpretation which could lead to some tricky situations. The FAQ page suggests that if you are unsure if your use is commercial or non-commercial you should contact the license holder to see how they would interpret the use.

In the reading by David Wiley a future is imagined where the non-commercial part of the CC license brings about lawsuits because of interpretation. Eventually the non-commercial part is taken out and the issue is solved. Is this solution too optimistic? Would the actual reality be more complicated?

Confusion abounds in the copyright issue. What constitutes fair dealing or fair use? In the USA educational use of works is covered under fair use. In Canada (where I live) this is not the case. Fair dealing in Canada does not pertain to education. If I wanted to show a video in my class for educational purposes I would have to write to the copyright holder for permission. I found a rather handy quick guide on some of the differences at the Concordia University Library website. In Canada educational institutions must belong to collectives like Access Copyright in order to make copies of works for classes. As we read in class this week Access is raising its rates significantly which will raise issues for the next academic year.

At the very least all of the different options available make it difficult to navigate what you can use and what you can't. It might be simpler to have just copyright and public domain, but with copyright laws differing so much from country to country it would still be pretty complicated.

Different licensing options like those offered by CC offer an alternative to restrictive and obsolete copyright laws. It might not be the perfect alternative but I think we can look at it as a healthy step along the way to copyright reform. I am hoping for the evolution of the marketplace to new types of copyright which allow for the protection of both the producer and the consumer.

Interestingly, on my way home from work today I heard a podcast interview on the TVO show Search Engine regarding some thoughts on the future of Fair Dealings in Canada. You can listen here if you are interested.