D 2012

Creative Commons and Grand Challenge to Make Legal Language Simple

MYŠKA, Matěj, Terezie SMEJKALOVÁ, Jaromír ŠAVELKA and Martin ŠKOP

Basic information

Original name

Creative Commons and Grand Challenge to Make Legal Language Simple

Authors

MYŠKA, Matěj (203 Czech Republic, belonging to the institution), Terezie SMEJKALOVÁ (203 Czech Republic, belonging to the institution), Jaromír ŠAVELKA (203 Czech Republic, belonging to the institution) and Martin ŠKOP (203 Czech Republic, guarantor, belonging to the institution)

Edition

Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, AI Approaches to the Complexity of Legal Systems. Models and Ethical Challenges for Legal Systems, Legal Language and Legal Ontologies, Argumentation and Software Agents, p. 271-285, 15 pp. 2012

Publisher

Springer

Other information

Language

English

Type of outcome

Stať ve sborníku

Field of Study

50501 Law

Country of publisher

Germany

Confidentiality degree

není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství

Publication form

printed version "print"

RIV identification code

RIV/00216224:14220/12:00062135

Organization unit

Faculty of Law

ISBN

978-3-642-35730-5

Keywords in English

legal language simplification certainty copyright Creative Commons

Tags

Změněno: 9/9/2020 14:47, Mgr. Petra Georgala

Abstract

V originále

In this paper we analyse the Creative Commons computerized licensing system. We draw the attention to the fact that despite considerable efforts to make the complicated task of licensing work using so-called free license as simple as possible, the system is apt to give rise to countless ambiguities often leading to copyright infringements. We maintain that the phenomenon has been caused by the modifications of ‘language’ that facilitates the communication of the relevant section of law and consequent loss of vital context and structure in the framework of which the communication has to be perceived. We come to a conclusion that while context and structure preserving modifications should be regarded as the preferable method of simplifying legal language, its scope is too narrow to achieve the goal of making legal language easily understandable for a layperson. Unconstrained simplification is powerful enough to achieve the goal but entails a danger of driving a layperson, as well as a professional, into undesirable outcomes.