On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 7:34 PM, Dahlia Trimble <[email protected]> wrote: > Agreed that there should be a way to attach a license to an asset. Prim > assets can have a notecard included which might be useful as a way to convey > license, but other assets such as textures, animations, and even closed > source scripts are unable to have any additional attributes associated with > them using this method. > I'm not sure I would support having Creative Commons be the default > though... while it is an excellent option for some work and I have used it > for some content I have developed, it does reduce the creator's rights that > are normally assumed by the Berne convention or US copyright laws. I think > it would be nice to have a few boilerplate licenses such as Creative Commons > of GPL or BSD or whatever available, but only as an addition to the ability > to add free-form license text. > Then again, I really think we need some kind of asset metadata storage > capability, and license could be one metadata attribute.
Any help? http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CcREL > On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 8:30 AM, Michael Cortez <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> James Stallings II wrote: >> > Perhaps So Mel, But.... >> > ....Where is the similar licensing or release from obligation under >> > license for the OS grid content? >> > >> > It seems to me there's a double standard in the offing here, whereby >> > content from the Linden Grid is hands-off for legal reasons, but not >> > so much as a tip of the hat in that direction when it comes to content >> > from an OS grid. >> Depending on your interpretation of Linden Lab's legal documents >> including their ToS, one may come to the conclusion that the only person >> who is being granted a copyright license (regardless of what permissions >> check boxes you click) is Linden Labs, who is being granted a right to >> use a creators content as intended by the creator within their system. >> >> Now of course this is just one interpretation, and I'm sure if you get >> two different lawyers in the same room looking at those documents you >> may get two completely different answers as well. >> >> This in my humble opinion is a good reason why I believe the asset >> system should be extended in such a way that every asset can have a text >> blob attached to it that includes actual licensing terms -- perhaps with >> the default check box permissions being assigned to various creative >> commons licensing attributes. Or allow the user to decide what those >> check boxes mean for themselves and when they encounter an item where >> they're different, they're informed via blue message box (for legacy >> integration) -- but even better would be to talk to the Hippo and other >> alternative viewer creators, to see if something can be integrated to >> display the creators licensing terms directly. >> >> Just a few random thoughts, >> -- >> Michael Cortez >> _______________________________________________ >> Opensim-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > Opensim-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > _______________________________________________ Opensim-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
