Comments on: EDUCAUSE: 7 things you should know about Creative Commons http://www.lessig.org/2007/03/educause-7-things-you-should-k/ Blog, news, books Tue, 10 Oct 2017 06:01:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.8.2 By: Jess Austin http://www.lessig.org/2007/03/educause-7-things-you-should-k/#comment-15467 Tue, 13 Mar 2007 21:35:51 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2007/03/educause_7_things_you_should_k.html#comment-15467 After reading the report, I would suggest handling the problem it identifies the same way that the GPL does. Don’t address the use (the report says “incorporation”, but I think that’s what it means) of materials. Among verbs, “use” is less vague than perhaps only “do” and “have”. Instead, address the distribution of materials: a private powerpoint performance is not distribution, but if any viewer retains handouts that contain a BY-SA picture, those handouts are also BY-SA.

I hope this is what you meant, under the assumption that a powerpoint presentation is not distributed. I would have thought all this had been covered before, but this post at least raises the possibility that it hasn’t been.

]]>
By: Jess Austin http://www.lessig.org/2007/03/educause-7-things-you-should-k/#comment-15466 Tue, 13 Mar 2007 21:09:08 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2007/03/educause_7_things_you_should_k.html#comment-15466 I had the same reaction as Alan. I have heard SA compared to the GPL before, and I thought that was a point in CC’s favor. Virality is a good thing. If the SA provision doesn’t provide this, then freedom-minded creators may avoid CC altogether.

]]>
By: Alan De Smet http://www.lessig.org/2007/03/educause-7-things-you-should-k/#comment-15465 Tue, 13 Mar 2007 20:53:30 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2007/03/educause_7_things_you_should_k.html#comment-15465 “Does the whole report have to be BY-SA? My view is no – including a picture is not a derivative work of the picture.”

Oof. As someone who has chosen the SA limitation for some of my works, I find that surprising. Apparentlythose works are freer than I intended. It’s not a big deal for me, but my intention was not to allow others to directly include my works unmodified in a bigger work without them sharing the resulting bigger work. Similarly, when looking for images for a presentation I did last year, I specifically avoided works with the SA limitation since I didn’t have the rights to release the entire presentation under a CC license. By your reading I was unnecessarily restricting myself; given the goals of CC, users being unnecessarily cautious of SA works seems like a bad thing.

I’m curious where you draw the line? Does Jonathon Coulton’s excellent “flickr” video count as derivative as he’s presenting the images unmodified? (Well sort of unmodified; he zooms in and out on them.) The license’s discussion about synchronizing music seems to suggest yes. What if I took BY-SA images for my report and did simple modifications to them (cropping them, say). What much now be shared under an SA license? The report, or just the modified image.

That I had such radically different view of what SA meant suggests that Educause is right and perhaps this is an area that needs further consideration.

]]>