Creative Commons

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

Moderator: Moderator

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

Re: Creative Commons

Postby Moderator » Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:00 pm

Lori Koonce wrote:
But, for photos, especially digital ones, the law can be dodged on either side. I think it's a good thing that the producer of the photo spells out in terms that any dufus can understand what is allowed and what isn't when using a photo.

By the way, no matter how you copyright a photo, isn't the onus on the producer to decide how it will be used by those who may want to use it? IMO, CC just allows you to decide that before you're asked and not afterwards.


Well, no, the law cannot be dodged. Same as with any other form of creativity, if you don't have expressed permission to use it you cannot presume you do until proven differently.

The onus on the producer of a photo is to decide what level of permissions you grant, but unless you're extending a written blanket permission, the onus is upon the applicant to request permission.
- 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 » Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:16 pm

Pictures should be able to be used for cultural protests, like if I wanted to present a faux Time magazine cover with Osama on the cover and the caption: Osama: American Made.

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 » Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:37 pm

Barber

Here's what I think you're missing. The most restrictive CC license is written using the same laws that All Rights Reserved would follow.

So, if you choose that one, you aren't giving any permission to anyone for anything.

cynic
Posts: 2684
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 3:55 am
Location: chicago

Re: Creative Commons

Postby cynic » Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:49 pm

Lori Koonce wrote:Barber

Here's what I think you're missing. The most restrictive CC license is written using the same laws that All Rights Reserved would follow.

So, if you choose that one, you aren't giving any permission to anyone for anything.
lori;
correct me if i'm wrong.
for a fee, CC wil afford you the protection that us copyright law does ?
follow your bliss,mike

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

Re: Creative Commons

Postby Moderator » Thu Jun 02, 2011 8:31 pm

Lori Koonce wrote:Barber

Here's what I think you're missing. The most restrictive CC license is written using the same laws that All Rights Reserved would follow.

So, if you choose that one, you aren't giving any permission to anyone for anything.


But I already HAVE that right. Why...if it's already there protecting my work...do I stand to gain anything by having to go out and explain it explicitly?

And secondly, does the Commons come with additional teeth in the event someone thumbs their nose and uses the pic anyway? Is there something in the concept that says they will pursue and pay for the legal case to recover my payment?

The CC is only a way to force all artists to declare what is already law: don't use my stuff without my permission (which is what the vast majority of professional photographers will tell you is their preference).

I'm really missing any kind of value to professionals -- though it really does cover the backsides of people who can argue I didn't declare, so therefore it's open season on my photographs. Very few people, when you really get down to brass tacks, truly want their photographs freely posted on the net. Whether it's a news shot
( the main sort of photo pilfered); an advertising or fashion shot (the second most, just take a look at those cut-rate soft porn girl in a bikini sites); or photos of your kids on a pedo site (don't ask, but they exist) -- most folks would just as soon their pics be requested instead of taken and blogged into oblivion.

If you want your shots freely distributed, you can opt OUT of Copyright law by either saying so outright or not pursuing abusers. The rest of us would prefer the burden of proof rest with the person who wants to USE the shot. If you don't have permission, hands off. How much simpler can it get than that?
- 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 » Fri Jun 03, 2011 9:38 am

cynic wrote:
Lori Koonce wrote:Barber

Here's what I think you're missing. The most restrictive CC license is written using the same laws that All Rights Reserved would follow.

So, if you choose that one, you aren't giving any permission to anyone for anything.
lori;
correct me if i'm wrong.
for a fee, CC wil afford you the protection that us copyright law does ?


As far as I can tell cynic, yeah they do. It's actually a free service. All they have done is put some rather complicated legal terms into language all but the most stupid amongst us can understand.

cynic
Posts: 2684
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 3:55 am
Location: chicago

Re: Creative Commons

Postby cynic » Fri Jun 03, 2011 11:18 am

lori,
i had it wrong then; i didn't look closely enough, i thought there had to be a fee involved, if only to record or disseminate the information.
follow your bliss,mike

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 » Fri Jun 03, 2011 1:08 pm

cynic wrote:lori,
i had it wrong then; i didn't look closely enough, i thought there had to be a fee involved, if only to record or disseminate the information.



They supply you with a button that you can place somewhere on the work or website that takes you to the revelant materiles that they have posted at the CC Website.

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

Re: Creative Commons

Postby FrankChurch » Fri Jun 03, 2011 1:08 pm

Barber, look at it this way: Someone might use your pic but you live in a freer country. Role with that.

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

Re: Creative Commons

Postby Moderator » Fri Jun 03, 2011 1:59 pm

FrankChurch wrote:Barber, look at it this way: Someone might use your pic but you live in a freer country. Role with that.


And, since I'm protected by copyright, I can sue their ass off if necessary.

8)
- 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
Moderator
Site Admin
Posts: 10607
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 12:17 pm
Contact:

Re: Creative Commons

Postby Moderator » Fri Jun 03, 2011 2:13 pm

I do have a question, Lori. Under the CC, where is the Commercial Work, all rights reserved description? Or the Artistic Work, Not for Distribution?

Quoting wikipedia (a proponent)

There are six major licenses of the Creative Commons:

Attribution (CC-BY)
Attribution Share Alike (CC-BY-SA)
Attribution No Derivatives (CC-BY-ND)
Attribution Non-Commercial (CC-BY-NC)
Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike (CC-BY-NC-SA)
Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives (CC-BY-NC-ND)


They all presume the copy-ability of a work, and nowhere require payment or a complete restriction.

The descriptor at the bottom - reportedly the most restrictive - still allows for outright copying if you're not profiting, deriving other work and give the artist attribution.

Where's the "Do not pass go, do not collect $200?"
- I love to find adventure. All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.

cynic
Posts: 2684
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 3:55 am
Location: chicago

Re: Creative Commons

Postby cynic » Fri Jun 03, 2011 2:26 pm

if no one is profiting from your work, at your expense, what are your damages?
follow your bliss,mike

David Silver
Posts: 195
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 8:07 pm
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Contact:

Re: Creative Commons

Postby David Silver » Fri Jun 03, 2011 3:27 pm

cynic wrote:if no one is profiting from your work, at your expense, what are your damages?



The worst damages of them all...the cheapening of the value (on many levels) of the work!!!
We don't stop playing because we grow old.
We grow old because we stop playing.

-- George Bernard Shaw

cynic
Posts: 2684
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 3:55 am
Location: chicago

Re: Creative Commons

Postby cynic » Fri Jun 03, 2011 4:24 pm

David Silver wrote:
cynic wrote:if no one is profiting from your work, at your expense, what are your damages?

The worst damages of them all...the cheapening of the value (on many levels) of the work!!!
as much as an artist values their work, why would they actively spread it around without being paid first?

i suppose it may resemble steve's analogy of the lost wallet.

if the finder does not return the money, steve considers them a thief.

so scattering your photos (purposely leaving your wallet behind in a public place), although that could indicate the artist is not actively protecting (or valuing) the work, catching someone using it (especialy for profit) is an indication of the user's appreciation of the art , and proving the value of the work.

that's pretty sweet. Kinda like having a whole bunch of potential unpaid agents selling your work for you.
Granted you need to track them down and make them pay...pain in the ass is right.

but what i don't understand ; if you value your work (like your wallet), why would you purposely leave it laying around?

just to wait for someone to infringe on your copyright?

or do you expect them to come and offer you $ ? Good luck with that.
follow your bliss,mike

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

Re: Creative Commons

Postby Moderator » Fri Jun 03, 2011 4:28 pm

cynic wrote:if no one is profiting from your work, at your expense, what are your damages?


The same argument made by the free downloaders of Harlan and Adam Troy Castros books.

In ATC's case, he lost the contract for the third Andrea Cort novel. Not profitable because of free copy distribution, according to the publisher.

Besides, why should I let bloggers use my photos for free, for example, just because they aren't being paid? They don't make money, so it's okay they keep me from doing the same?
- I love to find adventure. All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.


Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests