Talking purely in terms of creative commons as opposed what we think is fair:
Firstly attribution does not mean they have to provide a linkback, unless you specify that this is how you want to be attributed (as the cc licenses say "You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor."). So they can plead ignorance on that if you dont spell it out for them. Creative commons is an experiment but it is also real and useful. It gives us a common starting point at the very least, and some real legalspeak so we dont have to draw up our own individual documents. If you expect creative commons to somehow enforce the terms they make accessible, then you could see them as bullshit I suppose, but I dont think its at all reasonable for them to do the enforcing, such things are always down to the victim & their representatives & the courts to proceed with. If you want to see if theres enough creative commons creators with enough resources to pool together and setup a watchdog to go after offenders then go for it, I just dont see why anybody should expect this to be the creative commons organisations role, anymore than they should be responsible for helping me put titles on videos. Anything they can do to help is a bonus but is not absolutely essential to making creative commons licenses have a practical purpose. Even if many organisations continued to flout cc terms after being made aware of their violation, I still think creative commons has been very useful. Concepts such as being given the right to redistribute, perform & build on the work of others, badly needed a framework. The internet made it possible for all this stuff to be done, but unless you want a complete free-for-all, some middle ground needed to be laid out, and cc certainly did that. AS for motives of those who ignore things like attribution and linkbacks, their motives seem pretty clearcut to me. Its not meaningless ignorance or maliciousness, its a desire that people watch all your videos through their site so that they can turn those eyeballs into dollars. Many will try this if they can get away with it, and the backlash from creators along with legal clarity in the form of cc terms, is what makes most of them correct themselves once they realise they wont get away with it. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In [email protected], "Jay dedman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > CreativeCommons.org > is this just a noble experiment? > > Most videos I have are CC-Attribution > (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/). > Its very clear that anyone can put this on their site, remix, even use > commerically. > but they must link back to me. > period. > > If I have an attribution-noncommerical license > (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/), then any site should > respect this accordingly and not put ads around my video. > None of this is difficult to understand. > the question is...will these aggregators sites respect or not. > > Lucas, I know you did a lot of work for CCmixter.org. > its an awesome place where people can put up music for sharing. > To use any of these songs, all most artists require is attribution. > But if I make a site, list of these songs and act like I wrote > them....what kind of ecology are we creating? Instead of people > wanting to share their work, it'll just make people feel ripped off. > > the only issue I have with Youtube.com and other similar sites is that > they do not allow creators to put a CC license on point of upload. > They help break the ecology. Nothing is clear. Confusion is ripe. A > lawyers dream. > > So Lucas, I am not crying. > i want anyone to link to my videos, just give me a linkback. > Its so easy to do technically. > The difficulty here is sorting out people's motives and awareness. > If a funded company is building a business by grabbing content without > attribution, its simply ignorance, maliciousness, or laziness. > I would love for the Videoblogging Group to at least be able to > educate so we eradicate the Ignorance. Then its up to each site to > choose where they stand with the community. > > is Creative Commons a noble experiment, or is it a real tool to help > create a healthy online ecology? > > jay > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Here I am.... > http://jaydedman.com >
