[cc-licenses] Possible way to subvert the intention of CC-BY-SA and other BY licenses

Gisle Hannemyr gisle at ifi.uio.no
Tue Jan 20 19:33:09 EST 2009

I think the core of your argument (that CC-BY-SA by removal
of byline is converted to CC-SA) is wrong.  A CC-SA license
does not exist.  While the photo in this particular instance
appear without a byline, this  does not in any way remove the
obligation, imposed by the license, that proper credit must
be given to the author for all other instances of use.

What this means is that Eve must credit the author if she
wants to legally use a photo under a CC-BY-SA  license.

What the license clearly tells her is: 1) that this work is
not in the public domain; 2) that the author has used a license
where he or she makes credit a condition for use.

Where Eve found it and whether or not it appeared with a
byline in that particular place does not matter.  The
license is clear, and whatever scheme Eva as engineered to
get the byline removed in one particular instance does not
change the license itself.

On 20.01.2009 21:06, geni wrote:
> "If You create a Collection, upon notice from any Licensor You must,
> to the extent practicable, remove from the Collection any credit as
> required by Section 4(c), as requested."
> "If You create an Adaptation, upon notice from any Licensor You must,
> to the extent practicable, remove from the Adaptation any credit as
> required by Section 4(c), as requested."
> These clauses are important but they do create a problem.
> In this case the CC-BY-SA work is a photo with a single author (Bob).
> Eve wants to use the pic without crediting the author.
> Eve gets the pic published as part of a collection of highly offensive
> works and makes sure Bob finds out.
> Bob uses the credit removal clause.
> Eve then uses the pic from the collection of highly offensive works
> and since there is no credit on it she doesn't have to credit Bob.
> In effect CC-BY-SA has been converted to CC-SA.
> Getting around this problem is somewhat tricky one approach would be
> to add a requirement that in the case of such removals it should be
> made clear that such a request has been made and a second requirement
> that in such cases a reasonable good faith attempt must be made to
> find and credit the author. This however suffers from being rather
> vague. A second option might be to allow the author to have their
> name/pseudonym replaced by a code that allows the image to be linked
> to them by a central repository of such codes. This however is
> complicated and the benefit of removing obvious credit in such cases
> is reduced (particularly if the authors of the highly offensive works
> opt for credit in the same way).
> So I don't really have a solution.

- gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://folk.uio.no/gisle/ ]
    "Don't follow leaders // Watch the parkin' meters" - Bob Dylan

More information about the cc-licenses mailing list