[cc-licenses] Changes to attribution: your attention wanted

Dj Everette djeverette at gmail.com
Sun Oct 7 16:17:59 EDT 2012


Huzzah!
On Oct 7, 2012 12:50 PM, "drew Roberts" <zotz at 100jamz.com> wrote:

> On Friday 05 October 2012 13:45:21 Dj Everette wrote:
> > The software world may seem to be a good reference standard. Howevrr in
> my
> > opinion the global media & entertainment industry standards regarding
> > copyright
>
> 1. They are developed for a different purpose.
>
> > are fully industrialized
>
> 2. This very industrialization is a part of the problem to be solved. It
> gives
> the industrialists and those with the wealth to operate on industrial
> scales
> a decided advantage over the lone creators.
>
> > and vetted
>
> 3. Vetted for the wrong purposes. Take for instance my recent questions
> concerning frequent total lack of attribution in the day to day operations
> of
> a broadcast radio station. I am not implying anything majorly sinister here
> (well beyond copyright in general) as they pay for their use of the songs
> and
> it would seem the license they get does not require attribution so they
> give
> it when it suits the flow of the program and leave it out for similar
> reasons.
>
> > and should be the guiding
> > principles. Seems like trying to develop the wheel  again.
>
> Different jobs, different tools. However, if the developed tools actually
> do
> work for the alternate purposes, fine, but surely this needs to be examined
> and concluded, not merely stipulated.
>
> all the best,
>
> drew
> >
> > On Oct 5, 2012 11:24 AM, "Luis Villa" <luis at tieguy.org> wrote:
> > > On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 3:00 PM, Andrew Harvey <
> andrew.harvey4 at gmail.com>
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > > On 29/09/12 14:02, Kat Walsh wrote:
> > > >> Identifying changes to the work:
> > > >>
> > > >> This one does not appear in 4.0d2--it is a new suggestion in the
> > > >> current internal draft, and something we'd like to hear community
> > > >> opinion on: "if You Share Adapted Material, You must indicate the
> > > >> Licensed Material was used and describe the changes made." (This
> would
> > > >> also be "reasonable to the medium, means, and context", as the other
> > > >> attribution information would be.)
> > > >>
> > > >> This appears in several other free licenses, and helps distinguish
> the
> > > >> contributions of each authors or group of authors. For example, a
> > > >> translation might bear the note "translated into Spanish by X".
> > > >> However, we also see it potentially presents problems in complying.
> > > >>
> > > >> There are a few specific questions we'd really like to hear answers
> > > >> to:
> > > >>
> > > >> 1. What existing uses of the licenses would this break or make
> > > >> extremely difficult, and how could it be improved?
> > > >> 2. What kind of description should be required: should a verbal
> > > >> description be required, or is the ability to see and compare the
> > > >> changes enough?
> > > >
> > > > I don't see this as being practical. If I'm working on remixing an
> > > > artistic work am I expected to record every change I make? eg.
> changed
> > > > colour levels, applied Gaussian blur, etc.
> > > >
> > > > That would become impractical, let along being ambiguous in the
> actual
> > > > requirement ie. which level of detail describing changes is enough
> for
> > > > compliance: "edited the original image", "applied Gaussian blur",
> > > > "applied Gaussian blur with settings of omega=0.246?
> > >
> > > I'd add that in practice these requirements are completely ignored in
> > > the wild in the software world, even when they are very mild. e.g.,
> > > Apache and GPL only require notice that the material has been changed,
> > > rather than any information about the nature of the change, and yet
> > > that is only rarely complied with.
> > >
> > > Luis
> _______________________________________________
> List info and archives at
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
> Unsubscribe at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/cc-licenses
>
> In consideration of people subscribed to this list to participate
> in the CC licenses http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0 development
> process, please direct unrelated discussions to the cc-community list
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/attachments/20121007/f81cc6ba/attachment.html 


More information about the cc-licenses mailing list