hello everybody,
here are some notes by hannibal, unfortunately he is an offline guy, but
after some deep discussion we agreed on the following terms almost the same
as the original ones by ziad and rami
- Attribution: نسب المصنف لمؤلفه legally its the correct term from Syrian
law point of view, and Hannibal see it more clear even for normal users than
العزو
- NonCommercial: الاستخدام غير التجاري
- ShareAlike: توزيع العمل وفق نفس الرخصة as of المشاركة بالمثل don't exists
in Syrian law, also the normal users may not understand the meaning of
المشاركة بالمثل as of it being a new concept
- NoDerivatives: بلا أعمال مشتقة as of that will be clear from legal aspect
and for normal users
sorry for the short email but its hard for me to summarize all the details
now, just wanted to share the result of the discussion.
Best Regards,
Bassel
would really appreciate it
>
> مرحبا زياد و رامي،
>
> يبدو أنه لن يتاح وقت كاف لأصوغ ملاحظاتي على تعريب الرخصة كما كنت أحب،
> فالمتبقي من الوقت قليل، لكني أستفسر منكما عن الترجمات التي تبنيتموها
> لمفردات الترخيص التالية:
>
> Attribution, NonCommercial, ShareAlike, NoDerivatives
>
> لأنه كما أوقن من أنكم تعلمون فإن هذه المفردات هي *واجهة* العامة على
> الرخصة و رأيي أن صياغتها ينبغي تكون بقدر كبير من العناية لتتصف بالقابلية
> الترويجية و سهولة الاستخدام إلى جانب الصحة و الدقة اللذين أعنى بهما كثيرا.
>
> أحمد غربية
>
> > Hi Ahmad,
> >
> >
> >
> > As promised, please find below my comments after consulting with Ziad.
> > For your ease of reference, they are in the same order you have raised
> > them.
> >
> >
> >
> > *1) **Attribution: العزو instead of نسب المصنف*
> >
> > We have agreed to use نسب المصنف as it gives the proper legal meaning
> > and is much clearer than what you suggested as it is literal translation.
> >
> > The /Jordanian Copyright Law/ does not use العزو. We have relied on the
> > spirit of Art 17/D that provides:
>
> Understood.
> I'm not arguing about legal relevance, and in this specific instance not
> even about clarity. My concern is how these words are used in the *human
> layer* of the license.
>
>
> > “The published works maybe used, without the consent of the author
> > subject to the following conditions and in the following cases:
> >
> > D. Quoting paragraphs of the work into another work for purposes of
> > illustration, explanation, discussion, critique, cultivation, or
> > examination within the limits justified by these purposes and provided
> > that the names of the work and author are mentioned.
>
> This is beside the point, but العزو, literally "attribution", is not
> concerned with "consent", either.
> It is also understood that the licensor grants this permission in
> advance, which is the real benefit of the CC license.
>
>
>
> > Art 8/A of the Jordanian /Copyright Law/ uses clearly Attribution and in
> > Arabic نسب المصنف. The right of attribution is one of the moral rights.
> > Moral rights are the foundation stone of author’s right system (‘droit
> > d’auteur’ system) as it has come to be applied in Europe (particularly
> > France) rather than the Anglo- Saxon ‘copyright system’. Art 8/A
> > provides that:
>
> I acknowledge this and the remaining legal basis you mention.
>
>
>
> > Also, in Arabic legal scholarship, it is not difficult to find Jordanian
> > and Egyptian copyright scholars refer to نسب المصنف as attributing the
> > name of the author to his work.
>
> I'm not thinking "Jordanian vs. Egyptian" copyright laws at all. I'm
> just arguing that maybe a justified and well-defined use of this or
> similar word could facilitate the use and acceptance of the license in
> its human front.
>
> In your professional opinion, do you think it would be possible to
> define what العزو (or another single suitable word) means in the context
> of the license (eventually a contract itself)?
> For example by stating that "in the context of this license xxx means
> yyyy in such a way [...]"?
>
> Alternatively, do you think it could be النسبة alone without the
> redundant المصنف ("work")? At least where the shor-hand form of the
> words are used in the license desgination, i.e. "Creative Commons:
> Attribution-XXX-YYY v3.0"?
>
>
> >
> >
> > *2) **NonCommercial: غيرالتجاري instead of غير تجارية*
>
> >
> > Your comment here is correct as we are not referring to the license, but
> > instead to the work. We will change it accordingly. Thank you for
> > raising this point.
>
> If you take a look at what I had sent on the mailing list you'd find a
> couple more of this kind of notes.
>
>
> >
> > *3) **ShareAlike: المشاركةبالمثل instead of توزيعه وفق نفس الترخيص
>
> > and the
> > unfinalised suggested alternative المشاركة على قدم المساواة*
> >
> > * *
> >
> > There is no corresponding word for ShareAlike in Arabic that is used in
> > the Jordanian /Copyright Law/ as this concept is not found.
> >
> > Again, your translation is literal and to some users (not familiar with
> > the word share alike in English) do not give the needed meaning.
> > Furthermore, most legal scholars would not know what you are taking
> > about if you use المشاركةبالمثل.
>
> I ask whether Share-alike has foundation in the legal jargon of English
> speaking jurisdictions? UK, US, Ausralia?
> If not, then there is space for defining words that are not necessarily
> rooted in existing legal jargon, as long as we define them well in the
> context and bind the definition to recognised, existing legal structures
> and code. Even if just for the sake of using it in the human layer of
> the license.
>
>
>
> > We have been creative in coming up with this combination of words that
> > give the meaning. I am not sure if we need to use a “catchy word” as we
> > can come with many alternatives, but would it be understood?
>
> If English-speaking people can be taught what "ShareAlike" means then it
> shouldn't be a problem educating Arabic speaking people what
> المشاركةبالمثل means.
>
> I other discussions about localisation I tend to give numerous examples
> about the seemingly unequivocal usage of words in the modern age and
> specially Internet domain, while their recent history reveal radically
> different usage. See for example spam, web, etc.. And by recent I mean
> only few decades, so that even and elderly who isn't familiar with the
> jargon of the Internet would have no clue about their use in this context.
>
> Again, my argument above will stand only if "ShareAlike" is made up in
> English with no precedence in legal code. You know better about this.
>
> >
> >
> >
> > *4) **NoDerivatives: بلااشتقاق*
>
> >
> > The Jordanian /Copyright Law/ does not use the word derivative as found
> > in the US /Copyright Act of 1976/, As Amended. "derivative work" is
> > defined in 17 U.S.C. § 101 as:
> >
> > “..a work based upon one or more pre-existing works, such as a
> > translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization,
> > motion picture version….”
> >
> >
> >
> > Art 9 of the Jordanian /Copyright Law/ provides that:
> >
> > “The author shall have the right to financially exploit his work in any
> > way he chooses... This right shall include:
> >
> > C. To translate his work into another language, adapt it, orchestrate
> > it, or make any alteration thereto…”
> >
> >
> >
> > We have been faithful to the wording of the law itself that uses
> > *(**اقتباس**), *and we didn’t want to come up with a new word that might
> > not be recognised.
>
> Legal points acknowledged. And I maintain the same arguments as above,
> if they stand.
>
>
>
> > It is true that the word “derivatives” do not appear in the title of the
> > Arabic license as the unported license that we have used did not include
> > it. Please make sure when you are reviewing the Arabic 03 license to
> > compare only with the unported licence. All comments must be based also
>
> > on the Jordanian /Copyright Law/.
>
> So you intend to use بلااقتباس as the license element equivalent to
> "NoDerivatives"?
>
>
> Again, regarding Jordanian law, I'm commenting here specifically on the
> words used in the human layer of the license, i.e. its title, which we
> have an agreement on, and the license elements. I don't have the legal
> expertise to judge your work, and I'm not trying to.
>
> What I'm trying to do is to ensure that these license element idioms are
> chosen in a way that could be easily used across the Arab World,
> regardless of the internal workings of the localised legal code; and
> most importantly that they be as *human* as much as possible; easy to
> learn and propagate.
>
>
>
> > I was referring to another Arabic 03 version that we want to send to CC.
> > This version is still not available online as we have to send it CC with
> > the English translation and have their approval.
>
> I don't have that. So proceeding with the critique of the reminder of
> the license text won't be feasible.
>
>
>
> > One last note , what do you mean by?
> >
> > “residual issues are: including “software” in the licensed word possibly
> > covered by CC license…”.
>
> I've raised few points in the first part of my critique of the license
> which I submitted to the mailing list in October 2008 [see
>
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-jo/2008-October/thread.html].
>
> I believe those are worthy of your consideration. Some linguistic notes,
> and suggestions for wording, and also some conceptual.
>
> Among those one about how the draft I had seen enumerates computer
> *software* among what the license is intended to cover. Wile I'm not
> arguing about the viability of this use of the license, I understand
> that the English versions I've seen refrains from counting software
> among its intended usage. I guess this is consciously left to other
> licenses designed specifically for that, like GNU.
>
> There are also notes about generalisations and specifications in the
> language of the license that I thought could benefit from reviewing.
> Nothing specific to any given legal jurisdiction. Or so I think.
>
>
>
> > Thank you again. Please let us know if you have further comments.
> Thank you, Rami, for taking the time to respond.
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 4:19 PM, Bassel Safadi <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> yes jon is sleeping in my house. you will be in Rotana :) reservations
>> made and confirmed..
>> the most expensive two things are the translation system and jon's ticket,
>> but no worries. I worked that out
>>
>> Hanibal read the current draft by rami and ziad, and found it good enough,
>> he said it also apply to Syrian law so we can use as it
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Bassel
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 1:05 PM, donna d.r. <[email protected]
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> if u need to save money, why dont u put Jon and myself in a lower
>>> category hotel? or Jon at your house?
>>> I dont mind going to a lower one..maybe Cham Palace?
>>> on another thread: have u seen the issues raised by Ahmad Gharbeia on the
>>> list? Joi would love to hear the opinions of other lawyers involved..would u
>>> mind to ask Hannibal what he thinks and let me know asap?
>>> it's pretty urgent
>>> thanks a lot my dear
>>> dona
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Donatella Della Ratta
>>> Creative Commons
>>> Arab World Media and Development Manager
>>>
>>> ++39 339 2248940
>>>
>>> CC Newsletter -- http://creativecommons.org/about/newsletter
>>> Help Build the Commons -- http://support.creativecommons.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Donatella Della Ratta
> Creative Commons
> Arab World Media and Development Manager
>
> ++39 339 2248940
>
> CC Newsletter -- http://creativecommons.org/about/newsletter
> Help Build the Commons -- http://support.creativecommons.org
>
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
لقد تلقيت هذه الرسالة لأنك مشترك في مجموعات Google مجموعة "CC Arab World
المشاع الإبداعي".
لإرسال هذا إلى هذه المجموعة، قم بإرسال بريد إلكتروني إلى
[email protected]
لإلغاء الاشتراك في هذه المجموعة، ابعث برسالة إلكترونية إلى
[email protected]
لخيارات أكثر، الرجاء زيارة المجموعة على
http://groups.google.com/group/cc-arab-world?hl=ar
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
