Do forgive me if the threading is a bit messed up on this, but Seth asks a question that I feel I should answer:
>Adam, I am unclear exactly what rights and protections you would like on >your work. I am not qualified to comment on the legalities of the matter, >especially regarding international copyright law. >Setting aside the law for a moment, are you looking for exclusive >commercial rights for your restoration work? are you looking >for legally enforceable authorship citation rights? Are you happy/unhappy >with having your work appear on WikiCommons? Are you interested in >derivative works? In order: * No, I am not looking for exclusive commercial rights. If I was, I would hardly be putting them under a CC-by license. * While I recognise that it may not apply in the United states, and that such power should be used carefully, yes, I would like legally eenforcable authorship citation rights. * If Commons stops trying to change a CC-by license to a PD one, I'm fine with Commons having the works. I don't actually *like* Commons much, but at the same time, I do think that the resources should be available to students/teachers/historians/etc, etc, and that a part of making these resources easily usable is waiving the right to commercial gain on my part. * If people want to further edit them, they can feel free. And this is pretty much why I found this whole conversation incredibly annoying. I was asking for a bare minimum of rights, in the full knowledge of what I was asking for, and limiting what I asked for to the absolute bare minimum possible - that I get attribution when it's used, in some manner, so that people can find the work I did and use it themselves. _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
