Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 New Zealand

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/nz/, 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-NZ, which the SPDX licence list does not define, so no identifier was invented. None of the forty two records in this review group has an SPDX identifier.

minor Rubric 2 odrl:target proposed

The record targets dalicc:CreativeWork only, while the 4.0 International parent CC-BY-SA-4.0 targets dalicc:CreativeWork and dcmitype:Dataset. Creative Commons licences are media neutral and this port grants the rights in all media and formats now known or later devised, but its legal text carries no database rights clause, unlike the Portuguese, Czech and Azerbaijani ports of this review group. Aligning the ports with the parents is a single library wide decision covering every Creative Commons port, so it is left as a proposal here.

info Rubric 3 odrl:permission none

The modelled permissions follow the grant. Clause 2.1 grants "a worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, Licence for use and for the duration of copyright in the Work", covering copying the Work, creating Adaptations with a duty to identify the changes, incorporating the Work into Collections, copying Adaptations or the Work as incorporated, and publishing, distributing, archiving, performing or otherwise disseminating the Work, the Adaptation or the Work in a Collection to the public, in any material form in any media. 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 permitted, which follows from the grant carrying no commercial restriction in this element set.

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. 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 around it. Clause 2.1, under "You must": "not assert or imply any connection with sponsorship or endorsement by the Original Author or Licensor of You or Your use of the Work".

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 shared, that the notices referring to the licence and to the warranty clause be kept intact, and that credit be given to the author and to any attribution parties. dalicc:modificationNotice is supported by the duty to take reasonable steps to label a change. 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. In this port the port is a rewrite rather than a translation: six clauses instead of eight, the duties and prohibitions gathered under "You must not" and "You must" inside the grant clause, a duty to remove the credit if the Licensor asks, and Clause 7 on the role of Creative Commons inside the licence body.

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. The clause accepts a licence on the same terms and conditions, a later version of it with the same Licence Elements, or any other Creative Commons licence, Unported or jurisdiction, with the same Licence Elements, which the model cannot express, so the record cannot say that a differently ported licence of the same element set satisfies the duty.

minor Rubric 6 dalicc:WarrantyDisclaimer applied

The record quoted the warranty clause of the Attribution element set of this port, which reads "the Work or any Adaptation is licensed by the Licensor". Clause 3 of this element set reads "the Work is licensed by the Licensor on an 'as is' and 'as available' basis and without any warranty of any kind, either express or implied". The clause was requoted from this legal code, and the trailing space of the literal was dropped.

info Rubric 6 dalicc:LiabilityLimitation none

dalicc:LiabilityLimitation is Clause 4 of this port, quoted verbatim, and it is the same sentence in all six element sets.

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.

info Rubric 7 cc:jurisdiction none

cc:jurisdiction is bpicounty:NewZealand, which matches the country of the legal code URL https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/nz/legalcode, and dalicc:validityType is dalicc:perpetual, which matches a grant for the duration of the applicable copyright. The port chooses no governing law but is written on New Zealand statute, naming the Copyright Act 1994, and Clause 6.3 excludes third party rights: a person who is not a party to the Licence has no rights under it. Note that the jurisdiction field records the legal home of the port, not a territorial limit: the grant itself is worldwide.

gap Rubric 8 odrl:prohibition none

The licence forbids technological protection measures and the vocabulary has no term for it. Clause 2.1, under "You must not": "impose any digital rights management technology on the Work, the Adaptation or the Work as incorporated in a Collection that alters or restricts the terms of this 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

The automatic termination of the licence on breach, with the survival of the definitions, the warranty and liability clauses and the miscellaneous provisions, has no vocabulary term. Proposed term: dalicc:terminationOnBreach. The direct licence that the licensor offers to every recipient of the work has none either. Proposed term: dalicc:downstreamOffer.

gap Rubric 8 record none

Moral rights have no vocabulary term. Clause 2.1 forbids the licensee to "falsely Attribute the Work to someone other than the Original Author" and to "subject the Work to any derogatory treatment as defined in the Copyright Act 1994", and Clause 2.7 has the Licensor, where it is the Original Author, waive the right to object to derogatory treatment so far as adaptation requires. 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. Clause 2.5 reserves the exclusive right to collect royalties, individually or through a collecting society, for any use of the Work which results in commercial advantage or private monetary compensation, and Clause 2.6 waives it for any use which does not. Proposed term: dalicc:royaltyCollectionReserved, with a counterpart for the waiver. Not expressible today, and 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 or another jurisdiction port with the same licence elements 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-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, the same set level duties, and only odrl:target still differs, because the parent also carries dcmitype:Dataset. 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-SA element set, across all three versions and every jurisdiction the library holds.

major Rubric 7 dalicc:terminatesOnBreach applied

The termination clause of this port reads: "The rights granted to You under this Licence shall terminate automatically upon any breach by You of the terms of this Licence." 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. Clause 2.1, under "You must not": "sublicense 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 the forty two 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.