[cc-community] Relicensing after cc-by-2.0 licence breach

Paul Dixon paul at elphin.com
Wed Feb 28 17:54:45 EST 2007


Mia Garlick wrote:
> one question i do have though is whether your site is using the  
> images under the terms of the CC license or whether you are using it  
> under separate terms of use & it is the public who come across it who  
> use it under the CC license (this latter arrangement is how flickr  
> operates).  in that case, what the CC license says becomes irrelevant  
> and its all down to your terms of use.
>   
We regard ourselves as using the licence yes.

> at the end of the day though, if someone doesn't want you to  
> distribute their image any more, regardless of who is right and who  
> is wrong, why do it? they reduce their exposure and you get a hassle  
> free inbox!!
>   
A good question. The aim of the project is to produce a permanent, 
freely available archive of geographically relevant photographs. The CC 
licence seems an excellent fit for these aims. The site isn't about 
providing a personal Flickr-like showcase for ones photos, it is about 
the archive as a whole. Think of it as dropping images into a time 
capsule for future generations. The contributor in question has 
submitted over 700 images. We have, in the past, pulled a smaller number 
of images for a quiet life, but there has to come a point when we have 
to say "hold on, we chose this licence for a reason".

However, in this case, we've done wrong and may have to take that hit. 
We get 6000 fresh images a week after all. Even so, I'd rather not erode 
the archive if it can be helped.

Paul





More information about the cc-community mailing list