[Osmf-talk] [OSM-talk] ODBL vote (was Re: Enough is enough: disinfecting OSM from poisonous people)

Lars Aronsson lars at aronsson.se
Thu Aug 12 15:27:16 UTC 2010


On 08/12/2010 12:50 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> As a general point, if you declare that something is "public domain" 
> (say, by a CC0 declaration), you can't reverse it 
> _for_that_particular_work_. You have already granted rights for people 
> to distribute it without infringing.
>
> You can, of course, declare that your future works will be licensed 
> differently.

On the photo sharing site Flickr.com, you can mark your photos as
licensed under Creative Commons. But recently, according to this blog,
http://www.technollama.co.uk/flickr-stock-photography-and-creative-commons
Getty Images offered to include users' pictures in their collection on
condition of exclusive deal, and encouraged users to remove the
Creative Commons licensing on Flickr. Legally, this has no effect,
but for people reusing images it can become hard to prove that
they once carried the CC license. This creates a legal uncertainty and
might scare people away from using CC-licensed stuff. There is a
need for a better way to document the licensing.

If Flickr were to refuse users to remove or alter the licensing of
their once CC-licensed images, that would help reducing the
uncertainty. It would emphasize that CC-licensing is a one-way
street with no U-turn. But I guess we shouldn't expect Flickr
to do this. If users want to change their mind, Flickr would
side with their customers rather than with those who reuse
CC-licensed images.


-- 
   Lars Aronsson (lars at aronsson.se)
   Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se






More information about the osmf-talk mailing list