[cc-community] CC-BY-SA for Jailhouse Lawyers?
greg at grossmeier.net
Wed Nov 23 13:23:24 EST 2011
<quote name="drew Roberts" date="2011-11-23" time="10:11:39 -0500">
> On Tuesday 22 November 2011 16:05:32 Paul Houle wrote:
> > My understanding is that the use of a CC-BY-SA photo in a book does
> > not make the book CC-BY-SA. If you crop the photograph and use it in
> > your book, you've got to release the cropped photo as CC-BY-SA but
> > there's no effect on the book. An image made from the image is a
> > derived work, but if the image is simply used as-is in a different
> > creative work, there's no issue.
> I would like to see that issue "fixed" in the next BY-SA license. Photos in
> books need to behave like songs in videos. Perhaps you can't use the same
> triggers in law but it should be doable and should be done.
Personally, I wouldn't like that 'issue' fixed in the next version. Why?
Because I'm a proponent of OER, and (for better or worse) much of what
is shared by higher education faculty as OER are their presentations.
If the whole presentation needs to be BY-SA because of one reused photo
then every photo in the presentation needs to be BY-SA or BY (but not
Why do I care about that even though I'm (again, personally) vocal
against the use of NC licenses? Because I realize that some people
produce very useful material and release it under NC licenses and it is
*already* a hard sell to faculty to only use openly licensed images in
their presentations (instead of the first result from Google Images).
By making SA expand to the collection then we continue to make it harder
for faculty to share their presentations.
[All that said, it is a trade off. I'm all for increasing the freedom
quotient in the world, but I'm also all for increasing sharing in the
It might be hard to get this to work since the -SA licenses all allow
downstream users to use later versions of the -SA license. See 4(b)ii:
(version 1.0 of the licenses are alone in not allowing that)
Since the later version (eg 4.0) of the -SA licenses will now affect
collections where as <=3.0 did not, it may be harder to convince the
public that this change is a good thing. But this is an issue with any
type of modifications to licenses that are ShareAlike/Reciprocal and
allow use of future versions (ie: not specific to CC licenses).
| Greg Grossmeier |
| http://grossmeier.net |
More information about the cc-community