[cc-community] CC-like video release form
Terry Hancock
hancock at anansispaceworks.com
Thu Jan 17 10:20:24 EST 2008
drew Roberts wrote:
> On Thursday 17 January 2008 01:20:47 Fred Benenson wrote:
>>>It's just like free software, really.
The above was quoted out of context.
What I said was that it was just like free software in the fact that
just because you have a legal right to use the software, you are not
exempted from laws which affect HOW you use it. If you use it to commit
a crime, you're still criminally prosecutable.
I think the kind of moral panic being expressed in this thread is
remarkably similar to the moral panic that people get when they realize
that "just anybody" can edit Wikipedia, or that "just anybody" can reuse
CC content, or that "just anybody" can revise and release free software.
It ignores the fact that there are social moderating factors that also
result from the "just anybody" rule which tend to marginalize the
abuses. Sure, people inject hostile code into free software packages,
but then people remove it again, too. Sure, people deface Wikipedia, but
people revert the damage, too.
If your image enters the "free domain" it becomes an icon, just like any
other celebrity or public figure image. Or that silly clipart guy with
the pipe ("Bob") or George Bush (how many swastikas has he had
photoshopped onto his head, I wonder?). Or even that girl in the Virgin
ad (is there by now anyone on Earth who *doesn't* realize she has NO
connection to Virgin and disapproved of the usage?).
IOW, the impact of such images is mollified by the fact that viewers
will quickly come to be aware that *anyone* can reuse that image
(especially since the license needs to be published with it -- you could
conceiveably make this true of the release as well), so the fact that
some "bad guy" is using it too doesn't mean much.
I mean, I can pick out two things I agreed with Hitler on: we both liked
Volkswagens and Tolkien. I really don't feel maligned by that chance
alignment.
Also, everything that applies in this case, must ALSO apply to a
commercial stock photo, right?
In any case, it'd be okay to place some limits on usage as long as they
are clear-cut and do not require asking.
For example, simply saying that the image "cannot be used to imply
endorsement of ideas or products" is probably fine, because that's
fairly straightforward and there's lots of precedent for it.
You might even get away with some kind of "anti-disparagement" clause,
but I think that would require much finer analysis to be sure that the
term can be applied unambiguously (you don't want another vagary like
"commercial use" to muddy the water).
Cheers,
Terry
--
Terry Hancock (hancock at AnansiSpaceworks.com)
Anansi Spaceworks http://www.AnansiSpaceworks.com
More information about the cc-community
mailing list