Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 France

minor Rubric 1 dct:source applied

The record carried cc:legalcode but no dct:source. The legal code page states the canonical URL of the licence, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/fr/, and the six 4.0 International parents carry exactly that pair, legal code plus deed. Added.

minor Rubric 2 odrl:target applied

The record targeted dalicc:CreativeWork only, while the 4.0 International parent CC-BY-NC-4.0 targets dalicc:CreativeWork and dcmitype:Dataset. This port licenses database rights in its own words, so the asset type is text supported rather than merely plausible. Article 3(e) grants a database right outright: "lorsque l'Oeuvre est une base de donnees, extraire et reutiliser des parties substantielles de l'Oeuvre". The preamble also names the "droits des producteurs de bases de donnees" among the rights protecting the work. Added dcmitype:Dataset.

info Rubric 3 odrl:permission none

Every modelled permission is supported by the grant. Article 3 grants, for the whole term of protection, "l'autorisation mondiale d'exercer a titre gratuit et non exclusif les droits suivants", a worldwide free and non exclusive authorisation. It covers reproduction, incorporation into collective works, distribution of copies or recordings, and presentation, representation or communication of the work to the public by any technical process, and the creation and reproduction of derivative works and their distribution, presentation, representation and communication to the public (article 3.b and 3.d). The record models this as odrl:reproduce, odrl:distribute, odrl:display, odrl:present, odrl:derive and cc:DerivativeWorks, plus odrl:modify and dalicc:ModifiedWorks, which rest on the technical modification sentence of the grant: Article 3: "Les droits ci-dessus incluent le droit d'effectuer les modifications necessaires techniquement a l'exercice des droits dans d'autres formats et procedes techniques."

minor Rubric 3 odrl:permission proposed

The record permits dalicc:chargeDistributionFee while prohibiting cc:CommercialUse. Article 4(c): "L'Acceptant ne peut exercer aucun des droits conferes par l'article 3 avec l'intention ou l'objectif d'obtenir un profit commercial ou une compensation financiere personnelle", with the file sharing carve out that follows it. The vocabulary defines dalicc:chargeDistributionFee as a fee covering the act of providing the work to a third party, so a pure cost recovery fee is arguable under the primary purpose test, but the statement sits uneasily next to the prohibition. The same statement is in the 4.0 International parent CC-BY-NC-4.0 and in every NonCommercial record of the library, so removing it is one library wide decision, not a defect of this port.

info Rubric 4 odrl:prohibition none

dalicc:ChangeLicense is prohibited, which the licence supports: Article 4(a): "L'Acceptant ne peut pas offrir ou imposer de conditions d'utilisation de l'Oeuvre qui alterent ou restreignent les termes du present Contrat ou l'exercice des droits qui y sont accordes au beneficiaire." dalicc:promote is prohibited, which rests on the reservation of all rights not expressly authorised in article 3 and the Creative Commons trademark paragraph of the notice around the licence body, not a clause of the licence itself cc:CommercialUse is prohibited, which the NonCommercial element of this set states directly.

info Rubric 5 odrl:duty none

The attribution and notice duties are present and supported. Article 4(a) requires a copy or the internet address of the contract with every reproduction or recording distributed, represented or communicated to the public, and that all information referring to the contract and to the exoneration of liability be kept intact. Credit is owed to the "Auteur Original" by name or pseudonym, with the title of the original work and, where possible, the URI the offeror associates with the work; a derivative must identify the use made of the work, for example "Traduction anglaise de l'Oeuvre par l'Auteur Original". The parties are named "Offrant" and "Acceptant" rather than licensor and licensee.. Article 4(d) requires a derivative to "indiquer les elements identifiant l'utilisation l'Oeuvre dans l'Oeuvre dite Derivee". The duties hang on odrl:distribute, odrl:modify and odrl:derive, which matches the licence, since they are triggered by making the work public rather than by private use.

info Rubric 6 dalicc:WarrantyDisclaimer none

dalicc:WarrantyDisclaimer and dalicc:LiabilityLimitation are quoted from the French text of this port and not from the English unported version, and each field holds its own clause. Article 5 (Garantie et exoneration de responsabilite) and article 6 (Limitation de responsabilite) are separate articles and the record keeps them apart: dalicc:WarrantyDisclaimer holds the whole of article 5 and dalicc:LiabilityLimitation holds article 6, both quoted verbatim in French. Article 5 of the French port is longer than the disclaimer of the other 2.0 ports because it carries a good faith representation by the offeror (5(a)) before the as is disclaimer (5(b)), like the South African port and unlike Austria, the Netherlands or Chile.

info Rubric 6 dalicc:additionalClauses none

The record has no dalicc:additionalClauses, so the clauses the ODRL policy cannot carry stay invisible: the reservation of unnamed rights, the downstream offer to recipients, the severability, waiver and entire agreement paragraphs and the termination rule. Article 7 ends the contract automatically on any breach by the acceptor, keeps the licences of downstream recipients alive and lets articles 1, 2, 5, 6 and 7 survive; article 8 makes the offeror propose a licence on identical terms to every recipient. The whole Creative Commons family is modelled this way.

info Rubric 7 cc:jurisdiction none

cc:jurisdiction is bpicounty:France, which matches the country of the legal code URL https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/fr/legalcode, and dalicc:validityType is dalicc:perpetual, which matches a grant made for the duration of copyright. Article 8(f): "Le droit applicable est le droit francais." cc:jurisdiction bpicounty:France records the legal home of the port; the grant itself is worldwide ("l'autorisation mondiale").

gap Rubric 8 odrl:prohibition none

The licence forbids technological protection measures and the vocabulary has no term for it. Article 4(a): "L'Acceptant ne peut pas reproduire, distribuer, representer ou communiquer au public l'Oeuvre, y compris par voie numerique, en utilisant une mesure technique de controle d'acces ou de controle d'utilisation qui serait contradictoire avec les termes de cet Accord contractuel." Proposed term: dalicc:applyTechnicalProtectionMeasures, an odrl:Action to be used as an odrl:Prohibition. Not modelled, because bending an existing term would be worse than the gap.

gap Rubric 8 record none

The automatic termination of the licence on breach, the survival of the named sections and the licence the licensor offers to every downstream recipient have no vocabulary terms. Article 7 ends the contract automatically on any breach by the acceptor, keeps the licences of downstream recipients alive and lets articles 1, 2, 5, 6 and 7 survive; article 8 makes the offeror propose a licence on identical terms to every recipient. Proposed terms: dalicc:terminationOnBreach and dalicc:downstreamOffer.

info Rubric 8 record none

The French 2.0 port has no moral rights clause: the droit moral of the Code de la propriete intellectuelle is inalienable and the text leaves it to the statute rather than restricting the licensee or binding the offeror. Article 6 mentions "prejudice ... moral" only as a head of damage. Nothing is missing from the record here, but the silence is worth recording next to the ports that do speak.

gap Rubric 8 record none

Article 4(e) reserves the compulsory collective management royalties in all six element sets, including the plain Paternite licence: "Dans le cas ou une utilisation de l'Oeuvre serait soumise a un regime legal de gestion collective obligatoire, l'Offrant se reserve le droit exclusif de collecter ces redevances par l'intermediaire de la societe de perception et de repartition des droits competente." The text names broadcasting and communication in a public place of commercial phonograms, some cases of cable and satellite retransmission, private copying of phonograms and videograms, and reprography. Article 3 and article 5(a)(i) both point back at it. The vocabulary has no term for a reserved royalty collection right. Proposed term: dalicc:royaltyCollectionReserved, with a companion for the waiver.

info Rubric 9 record none

The consistency check with the forty one axioms of licensedata/dependencygraph/dg_default.ttl reports no conflict, before and after the corrections, and the pre review baseline listed none for this record either.

info Rubric 10 record none

Port of Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International. The deontic model of this record is identical to the parent, statement for statement: the same permissions with the same duties, the same prohibitions and the same set level duties, and after the correction above the same odrl:target as well. What differs is the jurisdiction, the language of the legal text, the clause texts, and the version specific clauses of 2.0 that the model does not carry, chiefly the express prohibition of sublicensing, the technological measures clause and the royalty collection arrangements. The compatibility checker cannot tell this record from any other record of the BY-NC element set, across all three versions and every jurisdiction the library holds.

minor Rubric 4 odrl:prohibition applied

dalicc:promote was prohibited and no sentence of this text supports it. The statement was the library's reading of a legal default, that a copyright licence which says nothing about endorsement grants no right to it, and it sat in 519 of 581 records as a house convention. That reading is now an adopted dalicc:DefaultRule of the core dependency graph, which supplies it to every licence that is silent about the action, so a compatibility check reaches the same answer and the record states only what the text states. Removed on 2026-09-23; see section 13 of docs/LICENSE_REVIEW.md.

major Rubric 7 dalicc:terminatesOnBreach applied

The termination clause of this port reads: "Tout manquement aux termes du contrat par l'Acceptant entraîne la résiliation automatique du Contrat et la fin des droits qui en découlent." The licence ends automatically on a breach and this version of the text has no reinstatement clause, so dalicc:terminatesOnBreach is true and no dalicc:curePeriod is written, as on the unported record of the same version.

settled odrl:prohibition

The licence forbids sublicensing and the record does not say so. Article 4(a): "L'Acceptant ne peut pas ceder de droits sur l'Oeuvre." The French port renders the no sublicensing sentence of the unported text as a prohibition on transferring rights in the work. The vocabulary already has dalicc:sublicense, but no record in the library uses it and its skos:note says so, and the same sentence stands in every Creative Commons 2.0 and 3.0 record, so adding it to this review group alone would split the compatibility behaviour of one family. Proposed as one library wide correction, together with an update of the vocabulary note.