Creative Commons

General discussions of interest to readers and fans of Harlan Ellison.

Moderator: Moderator

User avatar
Lori Koonce
Posts: 3538
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2007 12:10 pm
Location: San Francisco California
Contact:

Creative Commons

Postby Lori Koonce » Tue May 24, 2011 1:25 pm

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/

This is a link to an explanation of how the Creative Commons licenses work. I'd love to know how you photographers and other creative types would feel if this managed to overtake current copyright laws.

User avatar
Moderator
Site Admin
Posts: 10607
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 12:17 pm
Contact:

Re: Creative Commons

Postby Moderator » Tue May 24, 2011 3:21 pm

Lori Koonce wrote:http://creativecommons.org/licenses/

This is a link to an explanation of how the Creative Commons licenses work. I'd love to know how you photographers and other creative types would feel if this managed to overtake current copyright laws.


Raped.

It in essence is saying "we're going to steal your stuff anyway, so you might as well lay back and enjoy it."

I cannot fathom any rational mind accepting the concept that I should release my work to consumers -- who ought to be paying for it -- at no charge simply because they're not turning around and selling it to others. Utterly irrational. At what point did we decide that I can take your stuff, Lori, simply because you elected to put it online? If I buy a book, am I entitled to photocopy the entirety and hand copies out to friends??? As long as I'm not making money, these "ideals" say it's okay -- which is utter rubbish.

These things infuriate me because they are stating, categorically, art ought to be distributed for free because there's really no intrinsic value in itand artists ought to be glad people can see and "appreciate" it. Baloney. You want to tell me how much you appreciate my art, effing grease my palms with appreciative green dollars.
- I love to find adventure. All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.

User avatar
Lori Koonce
Posts: 3538
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2007 12:10 pm
Location: San Francisco California
Contact:

Re: Creative Commons

Postby Lori Koonce » Tue May 24, 2011 3:53 pm

Having read the actual legal code for the most restrictive license, I don't see how that can happen. "You may not exercise any of the rights granted to You in Section 3 above in any manner that is primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation. "

Unless your picture ends up on a file sharing site that alone would cover your work from not being protected from non payment. Photos usually don't end up on file sharing sites, and that's the only exemption they make to that rule.

User avatar
Moderator
Site Admin
Posts: 10607
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 12:17 pm
Contact:

Re: Creative Commons

Postby Moderator » Tue May 24, 2011 4:09 pm

But it begs the whole question as to why I, as the artist, need to even chose what level of protection I have?

Currently, all I have to do is send out my pictures with a note that says "use anyway you want". If I don't send out that specific note, I'm protected to the full extent of the law. I already CAN opt out. But the Commons puts the onus on the artist to declare ownership, not the automatic protection we have now. The only reason to change copyright law is to make it easier to steal.
- I love to find adventure. All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.

User avatar
Lori Koonce
Posts: 3538
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2007 12:10 pm
Location: San Francisco California
Contact:

Re: Creative Commons

Postby Lori Koonce » Tue May 24, 2011 4:23 pm

It gives you the power to state a few things before the person even thinks about using your picture

1. Those things that you will allow to be done for free with no problem.

2. Those things you'd like to be asked about before free use

3. Those things that you refuse to let it be used for without just compensation.


Makes things a lot easier on you as a producer and me as a consumer. I don't have to write you to ask about anything, and it keeps you freed up from answering silly questions that should be easily understood from the above questions.

User avatar
swp
Posts: 366
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2005 5:59 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Creative Commons

Postby swp » Tue May 24, 2011 6:26 pm

Barber wrote:But it begs the whole question as to why I, as the artist, need to even chose what level of protection I have?

Currently, all I have to do is send out my pictures with a note that says "use anyway you want". If I don't send out that specific note, I'm protected to the full extent of the law. I already CAN opt out. But the Commons puts the onus on the artist to declare ownership, not the automatic protection we have now. The only reason to change copyright law is to make it easier to steal.

the law sees you and all of the non-artists as the same. equals. and indistinguishable. and those that aren't artists are far more ubiquitous than those that are. what you're asking is that several billion [sic] people declare their work as free so that grandma can see pictures of the kids without having to worry about it so that several thousand [sic] can be lazy. it's the needs of the many outweighing the needs of the few.

if you mileage is varying, you're going the wrong way. or you didn't lobby your congressman hard enough.
swp

User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 679
Joined: Wed May 21, 2003 12:03 pm

Re: Creative Commons

Postby admin » Tue May 24, 2011 9:41 pm

You've chosen to separate people into "artists" and "non-artists", and followed up with the contention that a minority should not enjoy legal protection from abuse on the basis that it inconveniences a majority.

I'd certainly be interested to see how either one of those would play out.

User avatar
Lori Koonce
Posts: 3538
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2007 12:10 pm
Location: San Francisco California
Contact:

Re: Creative Commons

Postby Lori Koonce » Wed May 25, 2011 11:05 am

Rick: They also suggest that people in the academic realm use CC as well. I'm not aware of any academics on the boards, so I didn't think to add them to the mix.

Barber: I'm just thinking that this would keep you from having to answer a flood of mail concerning a work that may become famous. As it stands right now, I have to ask you for ANY use, paid or unpaid. With CC, you can let people up front know what you will allow the product to be used for without payment. You can still use your judgment and take legal actions against those who use the product in a manner that you find objectionable.

User avatar
Moderator
Site Admin
Posts: 10607
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 12:17 pm
Contact:

Re: Creative Commons

Postby Moderator » Wed May 25, 2011 11:35 am

Lori Koonce wrote:Barber: I'm just thinking that this would keep you from having to answer a flood of mail concerning a work that may become famous. As it stands right now, I have to ask you for ANY use, paid or unpaid. With CC, you can let people up front know what you will allow the product to be used for without payment. You can still use your judgment and take legal actions against those who use the product in a manner that you find objectionable.


Don't misunderstand me -- I get the point of having a centralized database for free-use images. But until I have such a famous work that many people want to know if they can re-use it for free, I'm not going to need it. (Only a handful of photographs have ever become such a pop culture staple.)

But for the vast majority of artists the need to go and register each and every image as to the status is putting the onus on US to make the claim. Why not simplify the process and state that any image NOT registered or listed on the Commons cannot be used without permission? That ONLY those images listed there can be used freely.

That would create exactly the same status without making the artist responsible for double checking each and every copyrighted image against both the federal registration and then on the independent database.

It accomplishes the same thing without all of the extra work for the person who owns the image. There IS no gray area now, so why put together a process as if there is one? In my mind, you already simplify the issue if you tell people ONLY those pieces that can be used, and anything else MUST be conisdered proprietary.

(And, to reiterate and perhaps expand -- I do believe copyright law needs to be rewritten to accommodate some sort of ability for an artist to declare open season for their work. But it shouldn't do it at the expense of all of the other people who want the protection of existing laws and processes.)(The example you gave in which the editor stated there is some sort of "unknown" is still wrong. If you don't know if an image is copyrighted, it should be assumed you cannot use it. The only time an image should e used without checking with an artist is when it is expressly stated that it CAN be used in that manner. Lacking that statement, back away.)
- I love to find adventure. All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.

User avatar
Lori Koonce
Posts: 3538
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2007 12:10 pm
Location: San Francisco California
Contact:

Re: Creative Commons

Postby Lori Koonce » Wed May 25, 2011 11:46 am

Your points are well taken Barber, I just think it is a much more reasonable way to deal with issues of copyright announcement if you will.

The only problem I have is the way they give the consumer detailed information. I mean those who are going to steal product aren't going to bother pushing the button your provided with for detaisl.

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: Creative Commons

Postby FrankChurch » Wed May 25, 2011 3:59 pm

Certain creative ideas should be free because people need easy access to them to know how to respond to how the world works.

The free software movement is just one point of reference in this regard.

Why should I give my money to the greedheads at Microsoft, when I can have free software. Just the internet connection would cost money.

Open source WiFi I'm a bit more skeptical about.

User avatar
Moderator
Site Admin
Posts: 10607
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 12:17 pm
Contact:

Re: Creative Commons

Postby Moderator » Wed May 25, 2011 5:42 pm

FrankChurch wrote:Certain creative ideas should be free because people need easy access to them to know how to respond to how the world works.

The free software movement is just one point of reference in this regard.

Why should I give my money to the greedheads at Microsoft, when I can have free software. Just the internet connection would cost money.

Open source WiFi I'm a bit more skeptical about.


Okay, so riddle me this: who pays for the development of that software?

Ideas are free. Other people's labor is not. (Frank, you're a champion of the common man. So how come you want to give his work away to people who are too greedy to pay for it?)
- I love to find adventure. All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: Creative Commons

Postby FrankChurch » Wed May 25, 2011 5:57 pm

There are groups that distribute free software. They give them away.

User avatar
Moderator
Site Admin
Posts: 10607
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 12:17 pm
Contact:

Re: Creative Commons

Postby Moderator » Wed May 25, 2011 6:10 pm

FrankChurch wrote:There are groups that distribute free software. They give them away.


I didn't ask who pays to distribute it, I asked who pays for the development of it.
- I love to find adventure. All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.

User avatar
Ezra Lb.
Posts: 4547
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 8:02 am
Location: Washington, DC

Re: Creative Commons

Postby Ezra Lb. » Wed May 25, 2011 6:57 pm

Certain creative ideas should be free because people need easy access to them to know how to respond to how the world works.

Yeah Porky the Pig T-Shirts want to be free!
“We must not always talk in the marketplace,” Hester Prynne said, “of what happens to us in the forest.”
-Nathaniel Hawthorne, The Scarlet Letter


Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot] and 3 guests