Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: [cc-licenses] 4.0: misc changes and date for closing public discussion

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Cc <cc AT phizz.demon.co.uk>
  • To: cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] 4.0: misc changes and date for closing public discussion
  • Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 18:58:41 +0000

On 31/10/2013 00:51, Diane Peters wrote:
Hi everyone,

We've updated the html on the staging server to reflect a few changes,
none of which should be controversial:

* Updated the definition of Share to specifically reference
importation. This is an exclusive right granted authors in many
countries. While we believe it ought already be construed as a
permission granted under all six licenses, upon close inspection
we've decided to make it unambiguous.
* Language improvements (miscellaneous) to the introductory section on
Using Creative Commons licenses.
* In section 2, we separated and made independent the requirements
that you retain a link to the license and retain a disclaimer of
warranties, to avoid any argument that the requirements were
interdependent.

Updated html:

http://staging.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
http://staging.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode
http://staging.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/legalcode
http://staging.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/legalcode
http://staging.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/legalcode
http://staging.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode


With this, we will be formally closing the public comment period on 4.0
this Friday, November 1st, subject only to a final hard proof reading
here at HQ. We will be sharing our launch plans for 4.0 then.


Super, I think that in order to clarify the attribution bit, you may have screwed up the whole thing. As I understand it section 3.2:

You may satisfy the conditions in (1) above in any
reasonable manner based on the medium, means, and
context in which the Licensed Material is Shared.
For example, it may be reasonable to satisfy the
conditions by providing a URI or hyperlink to a
resource that includes the required information.

means that you don't have to display all the information
on the page where the work (image) is displayed but that
a link to the information will suffice. Something like how on
Wikipedia the images link to the copyright information, no
problem there.

The problem arises as the idiots over on wikipedia now seem
to think that they can delete the attribution and original
title, and still be in compliance with the license given
that the stuff will remain in the deletion history.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales/Archive_147#Wikipedia_image_summaries_are_used_to_advertise_things

They are already cloning out watermarks, now they seem to think
that attribution is satisfied by a chain of links.





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page