Hi all, sorry for my late response. Comments inline. <quoting name="Niels Kjøller Hansen" date="2009-09-22" time="09:02:56 +0200">
> man, 21 09 2009 kl. 22:57 +0200, skrev Leandro Gómez: > > 2009/9/21, Søren Bredlund Caspersen <[email protected]>: > > > 2009/9/21 Leandro Gómez <[email protected]>: > > >> 2009/9/20 Søren Bredlund Caspersen <[email protected]> > > <SNIP> > > > >> I understand the license this way: > > >> > > >> If you're using the graphics for promoting the event, it's ok to not > > >> attribute the author. It's the UGJ we're promoting and there's no need to > > >> link to the authors site. > > >> > > >> But, if you're distributing the artwork or making derivated use of it, > > >> then > > >> you must attribute. > > > > > > Can someone please confirm this? If you use these graphics to promote > > > the event, you don't have to live up to the license requirement of > > > attribution? Can there be made this kind of exceptions from the CC > > > license? > > > > >From the CC website: > > > > "If the work itself contains any copyright notices placed there by the > > copyright holder, you must leave those notices in tact, or reproduce > > them in a way that is reasonable to the medium in which you are > > re-publishing the work." > > > > The work itself (the .png graphic) doesn't contain any copyright > > notice, so IMHO you're not violating the license. > > > > http://wiki.creativecommons.org/FFAQ#How_do_I_properly_attribute_a_Creative_Commons_licensed_work.3F > > > > As I read it, the five bulletpoints on the linked FAQ-entry has an > implied AND in it. So just because the work doesn't contain a copyright > notice, it doesn't forego any attribution. That is correct. You must always give attribution to an author according to ANY of the CC licenses. > According to the CC-BY-SA license, every redistribution (even displaying > the button on your webpage) must be accompanied by the authors name and > a link to the license. Yep, see above. > However, the author IS allowed to grant every exception he or she likes. > So if the author thinks that "If you're using the graphics for promoting > the event, it's ok to not attribute the author.", then this is a > legitimate exception. Correct, but those kinds of exceptions, as they are not a part of the license, lead to confusion/only some people knowing about it, which you say below... > > But my point is that this is NOT implicit in the license and HAS to be > stated by the author in order to be applicable. So instead of each user > of the work should have to dig through this mailing list, stating this > exception on the wiki-page would be benificial. I agree that the author stating their additional exceptions everywhere they post it is helpful, and needed practically. So, in sum: the CC licenses say to always give attribution (otherwise you're plagarizing anyways, which isn't copyright infringement, but it is still "Not Cool"), but any author can state that they don't care about certain things. But doing so muddies the waters of what someone can and can't do with their work. All the best, Greg Note: I work for Creative Commons but I am NOT A LAWYER. -- loco-contacts mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/loco-contacts
