This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.5 License.
About a month ago a friend pointed me to an article which used a photograph of mine. The trouble was, this was a commercial use of my photo and while they did attribute the photo to me, my CC-BY-NC license didn’t allow for commercial use without asking me first. So, I took a chance and sent the author of the article my a $50 invoice for reprinting my photo. I didn’t ask them to take it down, I just asked that they pay me for the use.
I didn’t hear back for a week so I sent a follow-up invoice requesting that at a minimum I receive a response form them with how they planned on addressing the issue. Their response: the check is in the mail.
Lo an behold a few days later I received payment in the amount of $50. No apology, but here’s hoping that they learned their lesson.
(Thanks to Kathy D. for the heads up and I think my standard licensing fee just increased.)
If you’re going to set a CC license on your content please be sure you understand what you’re doing. Unlike some people…
I’ve been watching episode 272 of This Week in Law and one of the guests is Sarah Pearson of Creative Commons. I hear this bit and I immediately rewound and listened again. Check it out:
So basically, if your use of a CC-licensed work would fall under Fair Use, you don’t have to follow the license! At least, not according to the folks at Creative Commons. Mind blown.
Well, I’m going to continue to follow the license in spirit every time (i.e. attribution at a minimum,) from the sounds of it I don’t have to all the time.
Still having a little trouble understanding the different types of CC licenses, or just need an easy visual way to explain it to others? Check out this poster from CC Poland, translated into English by Digital Inspiration.
Copyright! Complicated, confusing, and not clear-cut. What does a librarian need to know? Michael Sauers and Laura Johnson, from the Nebraska Library Commission, will present scenarios to discuss, as we all shine a light on the subject and try to figure out what a librarian needs to do.
(Early on in the show we have some trouble with the polling software and it takes us a minute or so to solve the problem. Please bear with us through that small section of the recording.)
After more than two years of community discussions and many drafts, the nonprofit Creative Commons has released a new version of its popular copyright license suite. These licenses allow rightsholders to release some of the exclusive rights associated with copyright while retaining others, in a way that’s easy for re-users, indexable by computers, and that stands up to legal review in many countries.
Version 4.0 accomplishes some ambitious goals, but sticks to the spirit of earlier licenses, so that it shouldn’t disrupt existing uses. In several places, the text has been clarified to better reflect the way the public uses the licenses in practice. The attribution requirements, for example, have been slightly adjusted to better accommodate the way re-users are typically providing attribution, by expressly allowing attribution to come in the form of a link to a separate “credits” page.
Among the most notable changes, version 4.0 breaks with the earlier practice of “porting” licenses to different jurisdictions, and is now designed to work all over the world. In the same vein, Creative Commons will provide official translations of the license deeds so that licensors and licensees can read the text in the local languages.
Read the full article @ EFF.org.
This morning it was my privileged to present “Participating in the Creative Commons” for the Massachusetts Library System. The questions at the end were some of the most interesting I’ve ever received as a result of this presentation.
The session was recorded and as soon as I have access to the video I’ll be sure to post it here. In the mean time, here are the slides for those interested.