[cc-community] Being called a thief for using CC
Fred Benenson
fred.benenson at gmail.com
Sat Feb 16 13:17:03 EST 2008
This is interesting because usually someone posting something to the CC list
is on the other side of the line: the user whose CC license got violated.
Now the CC license is not being violated but the promise of a user to honor
his own license is being violated.
It's a difficult situation because it seems like the original creator did
not understand the full effect of the license -- have you bothered pointing
this out in a public way? Maybe I missed that part, but if you haven't, now
might be a good time to write a long blog post about this. Not to start a
flame war, but to justify your use of the licensed work. You might even have
a FAQ section about it near where the content is republished.
Hope that helps & IANAL,
F
On Feb 16, 2008 1:06 PM, Miguel Angel Barrera <mabarrera70 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Has he explained this in detail? He really shouldn't be able to do that
> > under NC-SA. Please can you forward (a translation of) his exact claim
> > of how this "hole" works to this list? If he's wrong hopefully people
> > will be able to say why, if he's right then CC really need to know.
>
> This is what he once said on a popular Spanish blog:
>
> ~~
> I am VERY upset because I've found an ethic "hole" in the license. It
> unethically allows copying an entire CC-licensed web site. It is
> legal, but not ethic. Someone has done it to me and I am royally
> pissed.
> ~~
>
> Note that in that discussion, he admits what we've done is legal,
> though that hasn't stopped him from declaring it "illegal" under other
> contexts where people doesn't know better. Just to be clear, we
> haven't copied the entire web site, only the translations. Of course
> when he says "it unethically allows..." that's a personal opinion of
> what he considers unethical, as if I copied the entire "Free Culture"
> book and not just one chapter, and post it in my site (respecting all
> aspects of the license) should be considered unethical. Isn't the
> whole point of CC to avoid these kind of conflicts?
>
> > You can copy the unaltered work under all the main CC licences, that
> > isn't a special permission that ND adds. Is he assuming that SA is the
> > opposite of ND? This isn't the case.
>
> Rob, bottom line is that he's just pissed someone copied his work and
> released it at a different site.
> Thanks,
> M.Angel
> _______________________________________________
> cc-community mailing list
> cc-community at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-community/attachments/20080216/72917dfb/attachment.htm
More information about the cc-community
mailing list