Development of Creative Commons licenses

["Dana Powers" <dana.powers AT gmail.com>]

It is definitely a problem anytime someone misunderstands what rights
and restrictions are covered by a particular license.  Right now CC
answers this particular question in FAQ 2.12 here:
http://tinyurl.com/3a3fav

Do you have thoughts on how this faq could be made more clear?

Dana

On 2/15/07, wolfgang wander <wwc AT lns.mit.edu> wrote:
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> cc-licenses mailing list
> cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses