[cc-licenses] Requirements for ...: toward a practicable definition of "author name" ?

Matthew J. Agnello matt.agnello at gmail.com
Thu Jan 3 14:55:37 EST 2008

"Reasonable" seems to be the difficult part. For instance, thinking  
beyond files for a moment, to credit yourself on a piece of ceramics,  
you have to alter the piece itself; like plaintext, a pot or a  
sculpture has no "metadata" (art museums usually ad a plaque of some  
kind). The sculptor may not want to alter the piece just to provide  
credit. It is reasonable to allow sculptors the freedom not to alter  
their work unnecessarily. But to require a plaque might also be  
unreasonable, especially if the work is functional -- imagine having  
to sell a credits page with each teapot. Unnessecary paperwork and  
beaurocracy is exactly what we want to avoid.

It is probably a good idea to give the user the most freedom to decide  
how to credit sources with the licensor providing the most information  
possible for the user to work with. How to protect sources from being  
marginalized at the same time... not sure on that one yet.

// Matt

Matthew J. Agnello

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 2, 2008, at 3:55 PM, jonathon <jonathon.blake at gmail.com> wrote:

> Geni wrote:
>>> Yes.  I'd actually go one step further:  Failure to include an  
>>> author
>>> name in the file metadata invalidates the CC license.
>> There are quite a selection of formats that have no reasonable way to
>> store that kind of metadata.
> Other than plain text, in which it can be included at either the top,
> or bottom of the file, what file formats do not have the ability to
> embed metadata?
> xan
> jonathon
> _______________________________________________
> cc-licenses mailing list
> cc-licenses at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses

More information about the cc-licenses mailing list