[cc-community] CC-BY-SA for Jailhouse Lawyers?
zotz at 100jamz.com
Thu Nov 24 13:25:16 EST 2011
On Wednesday 23 November 2011 13:23:24 Greg Grossmeier wrote:
> <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.
Let's put it this way, I have stopped posting my photos under a BY-SA license
since I figured this out.
I have recently begun wondering about putting my photos under a BY-NC-SA
license with extra permission to use in BY-SA works with the ability to use
for commercial purposes. This might do what I want. You want non-Free
commercial use, you pay. You are ok with Free use, I waive the NC part for
that Free and copyleft use. Thoughts folks? I know this would mess with the
BY-SA of the actual photos but it may be the lesser problem in my eyes
until / unless this does get fixed.
> 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
That's what I want. If you want to use copyright to prevent me from using your
work while you want a no-cost license from me to use my work in your, I have
a little issue with that.
My line would be if there is a copyright on the "thing" my work gets used in.
Stick a bunch of random photos on a CD in such a way that
the "collection", "grouping", whatever is the correct term here, does not get
a copyright then I am likely OK with the thing not being BY-SA as the thing
isn't even copyrighted in the first place. But if the thing gets a copyright
and my BY-SA work is a part of the thing, I want the thing to be BY-SA or at
> 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
Not sure how this increases sharing.
> 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).
I think to do this right, some new terms may need to be defined in the
licenses rather than using copyright terms of art. (speaking from a position
of vast ignorance here.)
all the best,
More information about the cc-community