Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Rob Myers <rob AT robmyers.org>]

Mike Linksvayer wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-01-15 at 14:03 +0100, Peter Brink wrote:
> > A derivative work must be the result of a _creative act_ originating 
> > from a human being. If a machine down- or upsamples a work there is no 
> > creative act involved, it's a just a mechanical transformation. A 
> > "thumbnail" is therefore a copy and not a derivative work.
>
> There is no such thing as "upsampling" so this logic cannot apply to
> versions of a work at higher resolution than offered. 

One can add information to a work, eg colorizing a black and white film 
or removing jpeg artefacts from a digital image. But yes this isn't 
technically "upsampling".

In jurisdictions where Bridgeman vs. Corel isn't relevent (ie not the US 
or Germany [which seems to have decided similarly]), the threshold of 
originality (rather than "creativity") may be up for grabs.  :-(

- Rob.