Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 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-sa/3.0/fr/, 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-SA-3.0-FR, which the SPDX licence list does not define: of the ported 3.0 licences SPDX knows only the Austrian, Australian, German, Dutch, United States and IGO ones. No identifier was invented, and none of the forty two records in this review group carries one.

minor Rubric 2 odrl:target applied

The record targeted dalicc:CreativeWork alone, while the 4.0 International parent CC-BY-SA-4.0 targets dalicc:CreativeWork and dcmitype:Dataset. This port licenses database rights expressly. Article 3 grants, over and above the copyright acts, the right to "extraire et reutiliser des parties substantielles" when the work is a database protected by the database producer right, the definition of "Oeuvre" covers "une base de donnees dans la mesure ou elle est protegee par le droit d'auteur ou le droit des producteurs de bases de donnees", and the licensor waives its own sui generis right where it holds one: "l'Offrant renonce a ce droit". Article 4(e) adds that article 3 and articles 4(a) and 4(b) do not apply to the part of the work that is covered by the database producer right alone. Because the grant of the database right is explicit in the text, dcmitype:Dataset was added rather than proposed.

info Rubric 3 odrl:permission none

The grant supports the modelled permissions. "l'Offrant autorise l'Acceptant a exercer a titre gratuit, non-exclusif, pour la duree de protection des droits applicables et pour le monde entier, les droits de" reproduire, distribuer and representer the work (article 3). The record models the grant as odrl:reproduce, odrl:distribute, odrl:display, odrl:present, odrl:derive, odrl:modify, cc:DerivativeWorks, and dalicc:ModifiedWorks for alterations short of a new derivative work.

info Rubric 4 odrl:prohibition none

dalicc:ChangeLicense is prohibited, which the licence supports: the work may be distributed or publicly performed only under the terms of this licence and the licensee may not offer or impose terms that restrict it, and an adaptation may be distributed only under this licence, a later version of it with the same licence elements, or another Creative Commons licence, unported or ported, with the same licence elements. dalicc:promote is prohibited, which in a 3.0 port rests on an express sentence of the attribution clause: the licensee may not implicitly or explicitly assert or imply any connection with, sponsorship or endorsement by the original author, the licensor or the attribution parties without their separate prior written permission. That is firmer support than the 2.0 ports have, where the same prohibition rested on the reservation of unnamed rights and on the trademark paragraph of the Creative Commons notice.

info Rubric 5 odrl:duty none

The attribution and notice duties are present and supported: the licence requires a copy of, or the URI for, the licence with every copy distributed or publicly performed, that all notices referring to the licence and to the warranty disclaimer be kept intact, and that credit be given with the name of the author or pseudonym, the title of the work, the URI the licensor associates with it and, for an adaptation, a credit identifying the use made of the work. In this port the parties are the "Offrant" (licensor) and the "Acceptant" (licensee), and credit is owed to the "Titulaire de Droits Originaire", the original rights holder, which the port defines to include performers, phonogram and videogram producers, broadcasters and database producers. 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. The cc:ShareAlike duty is carried at the level of the odrl:Set, as in the parent CC-BY-SA-4.0.

info Rubric 5 odrl:duty none

dalicc:modificationNotice is attached to odrl:modify and odrl:derive and the text supports it directly: the grant of the adaptation right is conditional on the adaptation taking reasonable steps to label, demarcate or otherwise identify that changes were made to the original work, with the translation example given in the port language.

info Rubric 5 odrl:duty none

The share-alike clause of the 3.0 ports is wider than a flat prohibition of relicensing: an adaptation may be distributed under this licence, under a later version of it carrying the same licence elements, or under any other Creative Commons licence, unported or ported to another jurisdiction, carrying the same licence elements. The record expresses this as a cc:ShareAlike duty plus a dalicc:ChangeLicense prohibition, which cannot say that a later version or another port with the same elements is an acceptable outgoing licence. The 4.0 International parent has the same limitation, and the consistency check would report a conflict if dalicc:ChangeLicense were permitted next to cc:ShareAlike, so the present modelling is the only one the checker allows.

info Rubric 6 dalicc:WarrantyDisclaimer none

dalicc:WarrantyDisclaimer and dalicc:LiabilityLimitation each hold their own clause and nothing else: the disclaimer field carries the disclaimer section of this port and the liability field carries the limitation of liability section, both quoted from the French text of the port and not from the English unported version, and both checked word for word against the legal code.

info Rubric 6 dalicc:additionalClauses none

The record has no dalicc:additionalClauses, so the clauses the ODRL policy cannot carry are not visible in the record at all: the reservation of rights not expressly granted, the downstream offer to every recipient, the automatic termination on breach with the survival of the named sections, and the severability, waiver and entire agreement paragraphs. 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-sa/3.0/fr/legalcode, and dalicc:validityType is dalicc:perpetual, which matches a grant made 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 French port carries no choice of law clause: article 8 ends with severability, waiver and entire agreement and names no governing law.

gap Rubric 8 odrl:prohibition none

The licence forbids technological protection measures and the vocabulary has no term for it. The clause is in article 4(a): when the licensee distributes or performs the work "il ne doit pas imposer de mesure technique de protection susceptible de restreindre la capacite du beneficiaire ulterieur a exercer les droits conferes par la presente Licence". 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

Three clauses of every 3.0 port have no vocabulary term. The automatic termination of the licence on breach, with the survival of the definitions, the disclaimer, the limitation of liability and the miscellaneous sections: proposed term dalicc:terminationOnBreach. The direct offer the licensor makes to every recipient of the work or of an adaptation, on the same terms: proposed term dalicc:downstreamOffer. The reservation of all rights not expressly granted: no term either.

gap Rubric 8 record none

Moral rights have no vocabulary term, in either direction: a clause that restricts the licensee, and a clause that leaves the author personal rights untouched by the licence. The port restricts the licensee. The closing paragraph of article 4 says that a licensee who reproduces, distributes or performs the work, an adaptation or a collection "doit respecter les droits moraux du Titulaire de Droits Originaire dans la mesure ou ce Titulaire en beneficie (comme les auteurs et les artistes-interpretes) et ne peut y renoncer". Proposed terms: dalicc:moralRightsRestriction and dalicc:moralRightsNonAssertion.

info Rubric 8 record none

The royalty collection arrangements are not expressible either, and they are the clause that differs most between the ports of one version. Article 3 of this element set closes with the same three regimes, but here the licensor waives both the waivable statutory right and the voluntary collection right, and only the non waivable compulsory one stays reserved, collected through the competent French society. The port is the only one in the review group that names the categories of compulsory collective management and that places the clause in the grant rather than in the restrictions.

gap Rubric 8 odrl:duty none

A share-alike duty that accepts a later version of the same licence, or another port with the same licence elements, cannot be expressed. Proposed: a property on the cc:ShareAlike duty, for example dalicc:shareAlikeAccepts, naming the licences the outgoing work may carry.

gap Rubric 8 record none

The sui generis database right is now visible in the record only through dcmitype:Dataset in odrl:target. The two statements the port actually makes about it, that the licensor waives its own database producer right, and that the restrictions of the licence do not apply to the part of the work protected by that right alone, have no vocabulary term. Proposed terms: dalicc:databaseRightsWaiver and dalicc:databaseRightsCarveOut.

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-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC-BY-SA-4.0). The deontic model of this record is identical to the parent, statement for statement: the same permissions with the same duties attached, the same prohibitions and the same set level duties, and, after the correction above, the same odrl:target. What differs is the jurisdiction, the language of the legal text and the clause texts quoted from it, 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 moral rights clause and the royalty collection arrangements. The compatibility checker cannot tell this record from the other records of the BY-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: Article 3 grants, over and above the copyright acts, the right to "extraire et reutiliser des parties substantielles" when the work is a database, the definition of Oeuvre covers "une base de donnees dans la mesure ou elle est protegee par le droit d'auteur ou le droit des producteurs de bases de donnees", and the licensor waives its own sui generis right where it holds one, "l'Offrant renonce a ce droit", and Article 4(e) adds that article 3 and articles 4(a) and 4(b) do not apply to the part of the work that is covered by the database producer right alone. 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-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: "Toute violation par l'Acceptant des clauses de cette Licence entraînera sa résiliation automatique 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. "L'Acceptant ne peut consentir de sous-licence sur l'Oeuvre." (article 4(a)). The vocabulary already has dalicc:sublicense, but it is used by no record in the library 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.