[cc-community] rethink attribution

drew Roberts zotz at 100jamz.com
Thu May 1 18:48:58 EDT 2008


On Thursday 01 May 2008 17:19:25 Rob Myers wrote:
> Jamison Young wrote:
> > is the traditional film credits system partly structured the way it
> > is because of the way rights are organized and payed out to artists?
> >
> > Could a different kind of attribution license exist/be adapted, that
> > might work this way? If the film maker did not want to attribute as
> > the art is being performed and wanted to put the credits at the end
> > or the beginning of the film, the film maker could goto a central
> > website and pay to have the rights cleared. Could be an interesting
> > idea for the CC+ protocols.
> > a lot of artists might go for this license, rather than just giving
> > the art to film makers via a traditional form of attribution for free.
>
> You don't have to attribute the work *as* it is performed, just *when*
> it is performed. You have to attribute it appropriately to the medium,
> and with the same emphasis as other credits.
>
> The work is being performed as part of the film. The appropriate time to
> display film credits is at the end (or beginning, depending on style).
> The appropriate attribution, equal to other attributions, is as part of
> the credits.
>
> So I don't think there is a problem with the licences and films.

Yes, but I think film is less problematic in this reguard than is radio 
broadcast of music and DJ use of music. If the attribution needs to be in 
audio form and in band, this is problematic.
>
> Managing attribution with CC+ is an interesting idea, though. Paying to
> waive attribution or attribute less prominently might be a useful degree
> of granularity between BY-SA and a proprietary licence.

Yes, it very well could be a very interesting angle to hash out. It may be 
counter productive or it may turn out to be a boon. Thoughts?
>
> IANAL, TINLA.
>
> - Rob.

all the best,

drew





More information about the cc-community mailing list