Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Romania

minor Rubric 1 dct:source applied

The record carried cc:legalcode but no dct:source. The legal code page of this port states the canonical URL of the licence, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ro/, and the six 4.0 International parents carry exactly that pair, legal code plus deed. Added.

info Rubric 1 spdx:licenseId none

SPDX has no identifier for this port. The legal code URL implies CC-BY-NC-SA-3.0-RO, which the SPDX licence list does not define, so none was invented. Of the thirty five records in this review group only the six German ones take an SPDX identifier.

minor Rubric 1 dct:title applied

The dct:title literal ended in a space, "Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Romania ", which the library list and the search index carry through. Removed. The same defect sits in the NonCommercial-ShareAlike record of every Creative Commons port in the library.

minor Rubric 2 odrl:target applied

The record targeted dalicc:CreativeWork only, while the 4.0 International parent CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0 targets dalicc:CreativeWork and dcmitype:Dataset. This port settles the sui generis database right expressly. Section 1 defines "Opera" to include "o baza de date in conformitate cu definitiile din legislatia in vigoare privind drepturile de autor si drepturile conexe" (a database as defined by the copyright and neighbouring rights legislation in force), Section 3 grants "in cazul in care opera este o baza de date, dreptul de a extrage si/sau a reutiliza parti substantiale din Opera" (where the work is a database, the right to extract and reuse substantial parts of it) and closes with "Daca Licentiatorul este titularul drepturilor sui-generis asupra unei baze de date, in conformitate cu legea nationala care implementeaza Directiva Europeana privind Bazele de Date, Licentiatorul va renunta la aceste drepturi" (if the Licensor holds sui generis database rights under the national law implementing the European Database Directive, the Licensor waives them). Section 4 adds that the restrictions do not apply to the parts of the Work that qualify only under the Romanian sui generis database right. Because the legal text names databases as licensed subject matter and disposes of the database maker's right in the grant itself, dcmitype:Dataset was added here rather than left as a proposal, which is how the same question was decided for the Portuguese, Czech and Azerbaijani ports. The ports in this review group whose text has no database clause at all, Ecuador and Brazil, keep the proposal.

info Rubric 3 odrl:permission none

The modelled permissions follow the grant. Section 3 (Autorizare) grants, for the whole term of protection, that "Licentiatorul acorda Licentiatului in mod neexclusiv, nelimitat teritorial si cu titlu gratuit autorizarea de a exercita urmatoarele drepturi" (the Licensor grants the Licensee, non exclusively, without territorial limit and free of charge, the authorisation to exercise the following rights): to reproduce the Work and incorporate it into Collections, to create and reproduce Adaptations, to distribute and communicate the Work and Adaptations to the public, and, where the Work is a database, to extract and reuse substantial parts of it. The record models this as odrl:reproduce, odrl:distribute, odrl:display, odrl:present, odrl:modify, odrl:derive, cc:DerivativeWorks and dalicc:ModifiedWorks. cc:CommercialUse is prohibited rather than permitted, which is the NonCommercial element.

info Rubric 4 odrl:prohibition none

dalicc:ChangeLicense is prohibited, which the licence supports: the work may be shared only under the terms of this licence and the licensee may not offer or impose terms that alter or restrict it or the rights of downstream recipients. dalicc:promote is prohibited, which the 3.0 text supports better than the 2.0 text did, because the no endorsement rule sits in the licence body rather than in the Creative Commons notice printed around it. Section 4(e): the Licensee "nu are dreptul de a sustine sau a sugera, direct sau indirect, orice legatura, finantare sau sustinere din partea Autorului, Titularului de Drepturi Conexe, Licentiatorului si/sau partii desemnate de acestia pentru atribuire". cc:CommercialUse is prohibited. Section 4(c): "Licentiatul nu poate exercita niciunul dintre drepturile acordate prin articolul 3 cu intentia directa sau scopul de a obtine un avantaj sau profit comercial sau o compensatie financiara personala", with the usual file sharing carve out where no payment changes hands.

info Rubric 5 odrl:duty none

The attribution and notice duties are present and supported: the licence requires a copy of the licence or its URI with every copy shared, that the notices referring to the licence and to the warranty clause be kept intact, and that credit be given, and in this port credit is owed to the "Autor" and to the "Titular de drepturi conexe" or to the party they designate, and the grant reaches phonograms, videograms, broadcasts and databases, since Section 1 brings all of them inside the definition of the Work. The duties hang on odrl:distribute, odrl:modify and odrl:derive, which matches the licence, since they are triggered by distributing or communicating the work to the public rather than by private use. dalicc:modificationNotice is supported by the duty to take reasonable steps to label a change.

info Rubric 5 odrl:duty none

cc:ShareAlike is a set level duty, which matches the licence: the share alike condition bites on derivative works rather than on a single permission. Section 4(b) accepts (i) this licence, (ii) a later version of it with the same Licence Options, or (iii) a Creative Commons licence of another jurisdiction, current or later, or the Unported version, carrying the same Options, naming "Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 SUA" as the example. The model cannot express which other licences satisfy the duty, so the record cannot say that a differently ported licence of the same element set will do.

minor Rubric 3 odrl:permission proposed

dalicc:chargeDistributionFee is permitted while cc:CommercialUse is prohibited. Under the test of this port, "Licentiatul nu poate exercita niciunul dintre drepturile acordate prin articolul 3 cu intentia directa sau scopul de a obtine un avantaj sau profit comercial sau o compensatie financiara personala", with the usual file sharing carve out where no payment changes hands, a pure cost recovery fee is arguable rather than plainly allowed. The statement also sits in the 4.0 International parent CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0 and in every NonCommercial record of the library, so this is one decision about the whole NonCommercial family rather than about this record. Not applied.

minor Rubric 6 dalicc:WarrantyDisclaimer applied

The clause was quoted from the wrong element set. The warranty clause of the Romanian port carries an internal cross reference to the royalty paragraph, and the letter and article of that reference differ per element set: the Attribution and Attribution-ShareAlike legal codes say "articolul 3 litera (f)", this one says "articolul 4 litera (f)". The record carried the Attribution wording. Requoted from this legal code, so that the field is now verbatim. Section 5 is headed "Garantie si exonerarea de raspundere" and carries two things at once: an affirmative good faith representation by the Licensor that it has obtained the rights needed and that the Work infringes nobody, and then the disclaimer sentence "Cu exceptia cazurilor prevazute expres in prezenta licenta sau intr-un alt acord scris, sau cerute de legea aplicabila, Opera este pusa la dispozitie fara vreo garantie de orice fel, expresa sau tacita". The record holds the whole section, which is the accurate reading of the field, since the section does contain a disclaimer. Section 6 (Limitarea raspunderii) sits in dalicc:LiabilityLimitation on its own.

info Rubric 6 dalicc:additionalClauses none

The clauses the ODRL policy cannot carry are not visible in the record: the reservation of unnamed rights, the direct licence that every recipient receives from the licensor, the automatic termination on breach with the survival list, the severability, waiver and entire agreement paragraphs, and the royalty collection arrangements. The whole Creative Commons family is modelled this way, so this is a family observation rather than a defect of this record.

info Rubric 7 cc:jurisdiction none

cc:jurisdiction is bpicounty:Romania, which matches the country of the legal code URL https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ro/legalcode, and dalicc:validityType is dalicc:perpetual, which matches a grant for the duration of the applicable copyright. Note that the jurisdiction field records the legal home of the port, not a territorial limit: the grant itself is worldwide. The port names no governing law.

gap Rubric 8 odrl:prohibition none

The licence forbids technological protection measures and the vocabulary has no term for it. Section 4(a): "Licentiatul nu are dreptul de a distribui sau de a comunica public Opera folosind masuri tehnice de protectie care restrang posibilitatea tertilor dobanditori de a-si exercita drepturile obtinute in conditiile prezentei licente." 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

Two clauses of the licence body have no vocabulary term. Section 7: the licence terminates automatically on any breach, licences granted downstream survive, and Sections 1, 2, 5, 6, 7 and 8 survive termination. Proposed term: dalicc:terminationOnBreach. Section 8: on every reproduction or communication to the public in digital form the Licensor offers the recipient a licence to the Work on the same terms. Proposed term: dalicc:downstreamOffer.

gap Rubric 8 record none

Moral rights have no vocabulary term, in either direction. Section 4 closes with "Drepturile morale raman nemodificate, in masura in care sunt recunoscute si nu pot face obliectul unor renuntari in conformitate cu legea aplicabila" (moral rights remain unaffected so far as applicable law recognises them and does not allow a waiver), the deferring formula. Proposed terms: dalicc:moralRightsRestriction for a clause that binds the licensee and dalicc:moralRightsNonAssertion for one in which the licensor undertakes not to assert them.

gap Rubric 8 record none

The royalty collection arrangement has no vocabulary term. Section 4(f) splits royalty collection three ways: a mandatory collective management regime (private copying levy is the example given), where the Licensor reserves the exclusive right to collect through the competent collecting society for commercial and non commercial use alike; an optional collective management regime (public lending right is the example), reserved for commercial use and waived for non commercial use; and voluntary collective management, waived for non commercial use and reserved for commercial use. The societies are described generically, none is named. Proposed term: dalicc:royaltyCollectionReserved, with a counterpart for the waiver. It is one of the few places where the ports of one version really differ from each other.

gap Rubric 8 odrl:duty none

The share alike duty that accepts a later version of the same licence, another jurisdiction port with the same licence elements or, in the German port, a licence declared compatible with Creative Commons, cannot be expressed. Proposed term: a property on the cc:ShareAlike duty, for example dalicc:shareAlikeAccepts.

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 CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0, the 4.0 International record of the same element set. 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 the same asset types too, now that the database clause of this port has brought dcmitype:Dataset into odrl:target. What differs is the jurisdiction, the language of the legal text, the clause texts and the version specific clauses of 3.0 that the model does not carry, chiefly the express prohibition of sublicensing, the technological measures clause, the royalty collection arrangement and the moral rights clause. The compatibility checker cannot tell this record from the other records of the BY-NC-SA element set, across all three versions and every jurisdiction the library holds.

major Rubric 3 odrl:permission applied

The record said nothing about the sui generis database right although the port's own text settles it, which the rubric 2 finding of this review read off the legal code: Section 1 defines Opera to include "o baza de date in conformitate cu definitiile din legislatia in vigoare privind drepturile de autor si drepturile conexe", Section 3 grants "in cazul in care opera este o baza de date, dreptul de a extrage si/sau a reutiliza parti substantiale din Opera" and closes with "Daca Licentiatorul este titularul drepturilor sui-generis asupra unei baze de date, in conformitate cu legea nationala care implementeaza Directiva Europeana privind Bazele de Date, Licentiatorul va renunta la aceste drepturi", and Section 4 adds that the restrictions do not apply to the parts of the Work that qualify only under the Romanian sui generis database right. Exercising that right is therefore permitted by this licence and dalicc:suiGenerisDatabaseRights is now a permission of the record. It carries no duty, which is where the 3.0 ports part company with the 4.0 text their parent CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0 models: Section 4(c) of 4.0 carries the conditions of Section 3(a) over to the database layer, while this port takes its own restrictions off the material that qualifies only under the database right. The cc:ShareAlike duty of this record sits at the level of the odrl:Set and still reaches this permission in the model; the term that would take the conditions off the database layer does not exist, and the gap finding of this review still records that. Under the proposed default rule eu-sui-generis-db of licensedata/dependencygraph/dg_eu.ttl the database right is not granted unless the licence grants it, so a record that is silent reads as a licence that keeps the right back, which this text contradicts.

major Rubric 7 dalicc:terminatesOnBreach applied

The termination clause of this port reads: "Această licenţă este reziliată de plin drept, iar drepturile acordate prin intermediul său vor înceta în mod implicit în cazul în care Licenţiatul săvârşeşte orice fel de încălcare a condiţiilor licenţei." 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. "Licentiatul nu are dreptul de a sublicentia Opera." (the Licensee has no right to sublicense the Work), Section 4(a). 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 the thirty five ports of 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. Other review groups made the same recommendation.