Feature #7115

make licensing info clear during group creation

Added by Matt Gold almost 3 years ago. Updated 6 months ago.

Reporter Feedback
Priority name:
Category name:
Groups (misc)
Target version:
Start date:
Due date:
% Done:


Estimated time:


as discussed during the CAC -- we should make the CC license explicit during group creation

Related issues

Related to CUNY Academic Commons - Feature #7112: Add Copyright option/question to users on blog creation wizardResolved2016-12-16

Related to CUNY Academic Commons - Feature #9938: License widgetResolved2018-06-15


#1 Updated by Boone Gorges almost 3 years ago

  • Status changed from Assigned to Reporter Feedback
  • Target version set to 1.11

Matt, can you please provide a bit more detail on the policy? I assume we will want to keep the text shown during group creation minimal, but also provide links to our own stated policy as well as an explanation of whatever CC license we use. Is section 2c of the canonical text? If so, a couple questions/thoughts:

- The text says "You may offer your Content on a more restrictive basis..." and explains how you can opt out of CC licensing, but CC-BY-SA-NC is quite restrictive as far as CC licenses go.
- If this policy applies to group members, the language should probably be updated to reflect the fact that there's no obvious opt-out tool for content posted in groups. (Even for group admins, there's no policy, but in any case it seems to me that it doesn't really hold water for the group admin to decide on a license for group members. This might be worth talking to Joe about.)

Also, if there are any suggestions from Matt or anyone else about where this language goes and what it looks like, feel free to provide it. I can do something myself and post it here for feedback, but it might save a bit of work if I got it right the first time.

#2 Updated by Matt Gold almost 3 years ago

  • Assignee changed from Boone Gorges to Megan Wacha

Thanks, Boone. I've added Megan to this ticket (as well as Luke and Lisa). Yes, the TOS is the canonical text as far as we have one. I think that "more restrictive," in this case, refers to plain old copyrighted text, though you are right that the differences between that and the NC-BY-SA cc license are not necessarily huge.

It seems to me that this issue needs further conversation before it is ready for technical implementation. We have to decide, first and foremost, what we want to tell users about what they can do and what can happen to their content. We may need to say, in the TOS, that Group Admins have the power to set copyright policy for the groups they administer and that members agree to that policy by joining them. So we may indeed need a conversation with Joe, but we also need conversation within our group regarding this issue.

Megan, is there any possibility that you'd be willing to take the lead on these conversations, working in concert with Luke and Lisa?

#3 Updated by Megan Wacha almost 3 years ago

Hi, All. I agree this issue needs further conversation, and I'm happy to take the lead on this w/ L&L. For me, it's not about being more or less restrictive, but promoting transparency and user choice. There may be instances in which a user does not want the information to be shared or migrated to other platforms (i.e. contributions to private groups) or isn't legally permitted to assign a CC license (i.e. shared files). There are a lot of fun discussions ahead!

I'm new to redmine - would folks prefer to have these conversations here or set a meeting for the new year?

#4 Updated by Boone Gorges over 2 years ago

  • Target version changed from 1.11 to 1.12

Bumping to our next major release, pending conversation about policy and language.

#5 Updated by Boone Gorges about 2 years ago

  • Related to Feature #7112: Add Copyright option/question to users on blog creation wizard added

#6 Updated by Boone Gorges about 2 years ago

This conversation should happen alongside #7112.

#7 Updated by Boone Gorges about 2 years ago

  • Target version changed from 1.12 to 1.13

#8 Updated by Boone Gorges over 1 year ago

  • Target version changed from 1.13 to 1.14

#9 Updated by Boone Gorges about 1 year ago

#10 Updated by Boone Gorges about 1 year ago

I wonder if we might use some of the work going into #9938 to guide what's being suggested here.

#11 Updated by Raymond Hoh about 1 year ago

I've updated #9938 to add licensing to the group creation and settings pages:

The comments above from Matt and Maura still need to be addressed.

If we cannot come to some agreement, I can always disable the group license functionality until the necessary licensing questions have been answered.

#12 Updated by Matt Gold about 1 year ago

Thanks, Ray. I think that we should bump this for now. I'm meeting with Megan next week and can discuss it with her then

#13 Updated by Raymond Hoh about 1 year ago

  • Target version changed from 1.14 to 1.15

I've disabled BuddyPress group integration from the license plugin for 1.14.

Bumping the ticket to 1.15 due to Matt's previous comment. Feel free to readjust if needed.

#14 Updated by Raymond Hoh 8 months ago

In last month's meeting, we discussed bringing back the Creative Commons license in groups, but only for public groups.

Please review the previous screenshots from comment 11 and let's discuss what needs to happen in order to include this in 1.15.

#15 Updated by Raymond Hoh 6 months ago

  • Target version changed from 1.15 to 1.16

Bumping this to 1.16 since the group creation flow is already set in the main #10987 ticket for 1.15.

Also available in: Atom PDF