[cc-community] Germany - NC/CC violation - request for help
Robert Atwood
lists at atwood.org.uk
Wed May 28 11:47:57 EDT 2008
rob at robmyers.org wrote:
> Quoting "Robert Atwood (lists)" <lists at atwood.org.uk>:
>
>> [...] I would think that arguing that
>> cropping to a different aspect ratio in a derivative work under the -sa-
>> license fits in this category is rather far-fetched, does being a member
>> of the 4:3 faction carry moral weight against the 16:9 faction?
>
> If the cropping negatively effects the appearance of the work then it
> can negatively effect the artist's reputation. So it's not completely
> far-fetched.
>
I guess you could come up with an example where simply cropping appears
to reverse a political message, so I shall concede that point already,
are we talking about aesthetic alterations here?
If its a specific aesthetic choice, I believe it is well within what
-sa- should allow. If the original artist doesn't want that they should
not use -sa- type of license, they should use the -nd- type, and offer
to separately grant permission or some kind of collaboration with some
creative control for derivative works.
I can see the association with political or the example given of
'adult entertainment' association being unwanted but a differing
aesthetic use of the material is what -sa- is all about, isn't it?
Again, what do these artists THINK people will do when making derivative
works ,if not recasting the material with different aesthetics?
An artistic quality judgment IMHO should really not be a violation of
those 'moral rights'. Must the -sa- deriving artist seek the original
artists' aesthetic judgment? No way. If so then it's totally useless
and might as well not exist.Even if the deriver , obeying all the terms
in the chosen -sa- type of license, makes what I think is a rubbish
artwork, I don't believe the 'moral rights' should allow me to protest
(legally) ... just because I don't' like it. Of course I can write a
scathing review, and/or make a re-derivation that illustrates my
feelings about it. IF the -sa-by- terms are followed it should be clear
who has done what, assuming (the -by- type of license was used.) Is
there an "anti-by" clause ? (you can use it but you MUST NOT attribute
me :=) )
Future critics might think the derivation is the greatest work of all
time, after all.
> (IANAL, TINLA).
>
> - Rob.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cc-community mailing list
> cc-community at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
More information about the cc-community
mailing list