[cc-community] Does BY-SA extend to a newspaper?
drew Roberts
zotz at 100jamz.com
Fri Apr 13 14:02:59 EDT 2007
On Friday 13 April 2007 01:37 pm, Lawrence Lessig wrote:
> I am not sure I see how the GFDL solves any perceived problem that BY-
> SA creates. The GFDL, like every copyleft license I know of, applies
> its obligation to license beyond the original work only if there is a
> "modification." It, more over, explicitly permits items to be mixed
> without the copyleft component being applied to the other works. A
> photographer concerned that the copyleft rules of the BY-SA don't
> obligate enough won't get additional obligations from the GFDL.
>
> This is indeed why, e.g., Erik, is thinking about a clever
> modification to the BY-SA scope to apply the obligation beyond
> derivatives. But until such modifications are added, either to the CC
> licenses or the GFDL, copyleft licenses will raise this important
> issue for photographers, and other authors too.
Would you care to comment on my thoughts on a way to deal with this as posted
here:
http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-community/2007-April/001702.html
Also, if something like this could work, could the sync rights move over to
such a scheme or could we at least have a more narrowly defined set of
circumstances where sync rights are needed?
all the best,
drew
>
> On Apr 12, 2007, at 1:23 PM, Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
> > <quote who="Elizabeth Stark" date="Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 05:51:06PM
> > -0400">
> >
> >> Nope. Under the license, it only applies to the photo itself in
> >> the context
> >> of a newspaper. So they used it correctly.
> >
> > CC seems to have a taken a position that the license basically
> > stops at
> > the edge of a photograph. Basically, this means that if you don't
> > modify
> > the content of a photograph, you can basically do what you want
> > with it
> > under an an SA license (of course, Evan's comments, and a few
> > things he
> > didn't say, still need to be kept in mind).
> >
> > This is one reason a number of photographs who upload to Wikimedia
> > Commons prefer the GFDL and its related to the reason why Larry Lessig
> > has analogizing NC clauses and copyleft for software -- although I
> > personally disagree with Lessig's argument in this respect.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Mako
> >
> >
> > --
> > Benjamin Mako Hill
> > mako at atdot.cc
> > http://mako.cc/
> >
> > Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so
> > far as society is free to use the results. --RMS
> > _______________________________________________
> > cc-community mailing list
> > cc-community at lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
>
> ______________
>
> Lawrence Lessig
> American Academy in Berlin
> Am Sandwerder 17/19
> Berlin D-14109
>
> office: +4930/804 83 301
> home: +4930/804 83 203
> cell: +49/1515 907 6197
> fax: +4930/804 83 222
> lessig at pobox.com
>
> Assistant: a2lessig at pobox.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cc-community mailing list
> cc-community at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
--
(da idea man)
More information about the cc-community
mailing list