Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: [cc-licenses] Clarification needed - Copyleft AND Share-Alike with Images

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: wolfgang wander <wwc AT lns.mit.edu>
  • To: peter.brink AT brinkdata.se, Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] Clarification needed - Copyleft AND Share-Alike with Images
  • Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 20:18:34 -0500

Peter Brink wrote:
> wolfgang wander skrev:
>> If you ..., BUILD UPON THIS WORK' which I clearly
>> understand as an inclusion of my images in editorial content.
>>
>
> Well, that is a misunderstanding. In fact, (IMO) there are two false
> assumptions here.
>
> A) When you use works (for example a text about racing cars and some
> photos of such cars) as building blocks to create a collective work,
> then the components used are treated as having independent copyrights.
> They might supplement each other but that doesn't make one or the other
> a derivative work. You of course need permission to copy and publish the
> works that makes up the collective work but that is granted by the
> license. An editor that uses your photos to supplement a text on a
> website does not build upon your work, he copies the photo but he does
> not adapt it.
>
> B) The CC-licenses are designed to extend the scope of choices available
> for _creators_ and thereby indirectly extend the freedom of users to
> re-use. They are not designed to extend one creators control over other
> creators independent works.

If that is the case, which it may well be, this should be stated then
in very clear terms so that photographers who look for a copyleft
license (which cc-by-sa was commonly referred to) aren't falling in the
same trap as I did here obviously.

The current example about movie and sound seem to imply derivation but
if this is not the case for images and text, by cc's definition,
cc-by-sa is not an option for me and probably not for any of my
colleagues who published under a similar assumption.

CC's interpretation of what kind of license has to apply to a
combination of text and images should be given a very prominent
place on the creative commons website.

Wolfgang




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page