[cc-community] [Icommons] Boing Boing's CC licensed videocast

Mike Linksvayer ml at creativecommons.org
Tue Oct 9 00:10:08 EDT 2007


It would probably be useful in some publishing workflows, though ideally
the notice would be added natively by whatever content creation tool is
being used, e.g. an OpenOffice plugin that makes facilitates license
choice and reflects that choice in available autotext with some default
placement (ie, just like page numbering) as well as in hidden metadata.
There was some progress on this in a Summer of Code project, see
http://techblog.creativecommons.org/category/openoffice/

Presumably an automatic stamper is going to stamp in a less than ideal
location (and less than ideal font) for many documents, but again, it
could be useful in some cases.

On Sun, 2007-10-07 at 16:23 +0200, John Hendrik Weitzmann wrote:
> (sorry for cross posting)
> 
> We are thinking about commisioning a programmer with developing a server 
> side application that can automatically add CC license information into 
> the content of PDF files, not only into the metadata.
> 
> If people are already working on this or already have some tool up and 
> running, we could save the money. So the question is, is that the case?
> 
> @Jon: Does the Marking media work you are doing cover what I mentioned 
> above? If not so, would it be helpful for you guys to get a tool for 
> automatic PDF content marking?
> 
> Greetz,
> John (CC Germany)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jon Phillips schrieb:
> > This seems like a good discussion to have on cc-community ;)
> > 
> > On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 14:29 +0300, Herkko Hietanen wrote:
> >> Alek makes a valid point!
> >>
> >> I tried to raise this issue at Harvard iSummit. I think it was the Brazilian
> >> team who had a video of Gil playing John Lennon's Imagine. They said that
> >> the performance was CC licensed. The point is that even if the performance
> >> is licensed, the underlying song is not. Thus if someone distributes it
> >> without the consent of Lennon's family they are infringers.
> >>
> >> I have not seen BoingBoings video, but if the robot segment is consider a
> >> quote it should be ok to license it at least with no derivatives license. A
> >> derivative license would enable licensees to cut the robot piece out and do
> >> whatever they want to which is something that licensor doesn't have a power
> >> to do. Using a ND license would keep intact the original use of quoting. 
> >>
> >> Herkko
> >> cc-fi
> > 
> > One thing which CC worked on over the summer is to create Marking media
> > which can be put at the beginning of a film, audio file, etc, which
> > marks the CC license used...
> > 
> > http://creativecommons.org/projects/marking
> > 
> > (video markers/bumpers)
> > http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC_video_bumpers
> > 
> > We are hoping to factor this work into various parts of the CC site,
> > license chooser updates, etc...but some way to build on this would be
> > great...
> > 
> > Jon
> > 
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: icommons-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:icommons-
> >>>> bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Alek Tarkowski
> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 1:51 PM
> >>>> To: icommons at lists.ibiblio.org
> >>>> Subject: [Icommons] Boing Boing's CC licensed videocast
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> I've just read about the new CC-licensed Boing Boing TV, which made me
> >>>> think of best practices regarding CC licensing.
> >>>>
> >>>> The thing is, the video is made up of multiple segments, to which the
> >>>> rights lie either with Boing Boing creators, or with someone else. Some
> >>>> are public domain, some are not. There is for instance a video of a
> >>>> robot playing "Crazy", a song written by Willie Nelson - and some
> >>>> mention in the video's comments, that due credit was not given in the
> >>>> video itself due to an ommission.
> >>>>
> >>>> While I am sure that Boing Boing got the legal side of things right, I
> >>>> think it might be confusing for viewers to read that the whole work is
> >>>> CC-licensed. So I'm thinking what the best practice would be - list
> >>>> every element with its copyright status description?
> >>>>
> >>>> This might, unfortunately, quickly become very tedious - but do we have
> >>>> a choice?
> >>>>
> >>>>> alek.
> >>>> --
> >>>> koordynator / public lead
> >>>> Creative Commons Polska / Poland
> >>>> http://creativecommons.pl
> >>>> skype: alektarkowski
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Icommons mailing list
> >>>> Icommons at lists.ibiblio.org
> >>>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/icommons
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Icommons mailing list
> >> Icommons at lists.ibiblio.org
> >> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/icommons
> _______________________________________________
> Icommons mailing list
> Icommons at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/icommons
-- 
  http://wiki.creativecommons.org/User:Mike_Linksvayer



More information about the cc-community mailing list