[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