On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Dan Dascalescu < [email protected] <ddascalescu%[email protected]>> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 06:23, <[email protected]> wrote: > > Would he, his heirs, or his estate object if the photo of the poem was > modified to be used in a fast-food ad or for a hate group? > > What does this have to do with the poem being engraved verbatim in a > public monument? > If someone intends to maintain control over how content is used -- which I think is what Elipongo was getting at -- that content is not freely licensed. If content is not under a free license, I believe we generally consider it "non-free". Where the clear intent of a photo is to reproduce a given text verbatim, I should think that the original copyright on that text (if any) still applies. Photographing pages of a book doesn't suddenly render the book's copyright moot, for example. -Luna _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
