Development of Creative Commons licenses

[jonathon <jonathon.blake AT gmail.com>]

Javier wrote:

>In any case, that's interesting. Reference? Is it likely that they
might succeed? I am interested more than academically, since I now
live in Australia.

http://www.4020.net/words/photorights.php is a description of
Australian law regarding photography.  It mentions some places that
attempted to ban public photography.  The bans won't succeed, but they
will be more than annoying for the photographer.

> I meant the creep of the scope of copyright. Requiring a release to publish 
> a photo that includes a recognizable building would be an example of such 
> creep.

For the US, I'd cite Thomas Shine v David Child but that was about
architectural plans, not photographs.

> What about encyclopedias?

Commercial usage.   Release required.

>Also, where does your "general rule of thumb" apply?

"General rule of thumb" applies when specific contrary information is
unknown, unobtainable, or ambiguous.  It is a risk avoidance policy.
(Consider it to be a part of "best practices".)

> Can you give a reference? What did exactly Seattle Symphony do? Can you 
> show me the relevant statute in US or Washington law?

Jack Mackie v. Connie Rieser and Seattle Symphony Orchestra Public
Benefit Corporation, 296 F.3d 909 (9th Circuit, 2002).  Seattle
Symphony Orchestra used a photograph of public art without obtaining
permission from the sculptor.

> As I say, I don't see how Toshio Iway or Fumito Ueda could sue me for me
> publishing commercially the photos I posted earlier, even under US

For the US, case law and "fair use doctrine" would apply, in terms of
what would be winnable.  It quite literally depends upon which town in
which state the work is located in, and the work is published in.  (
Copyright law is not the only law that comes into play here.)

> and the publisher paid me for the license to print them in their 
> encyclopedia.
> What have we (me or the publisher) done wrong, if at all? What's our risk?

The exact risk depends upon the state, and maybe even the county, or
town that the photograph is in, or in which the lawsuit was filed.

drew wrote:

>Does that not make a bit of sense?

Yes.   With releases for everything, you won't get a nasty surprise,
in the form of a lawsuit.

xan

jonathon