The Creative Commons license, for his own original works, is the choice of the author. He is not forced to do this (unless it's a derivative work based on another Creative Commons work, or he is publishing someone else's CC licensed work). He does it willingly. He makes the conscious decision to make his work copyable under certain restrictions, whether they be giving him credit, not making derivative works, derivative works allowed, restrictions on commercial use, no restrictions on commercial use, etc.
But he is giving you the right to copy it, nonetheless.
I spotted this one at the bottom of the page on a blog today:
According to the Creative Commons license for that site, in which the author links to, I CAN copy his content. According to the little Copyscape banner above it, I may not.
So which is it? Can I or can't I?
I wish authors would think about it seriously and make up their minds before they put the banners on their sites. They can't have it both ways. They can't say out of one side of their mouths you can copy their work, and out of the other that you can't. They are conflicting statements and ideas.
If you don't want to give people the legal right to copy your work, don't release it under any type of Creative Commons license. Retain full copyright and priviledges for yourself. And get the Creative Commons badges off your site!
3 comments:
Hi APP, I think maybe you might of misunderstood the label. The first one is to say please do not just copy my work as I will check. The second one is to say you can use it as long as you give the author credit for the work. Saying that I can understand how this may cause misunderstanding. Maybe I should make this clearer. Colin
Thank you for your response, Colin.
You are not the only author that has created confusion. I have heard other authors complaining when their work released under a creative commons license has been copied and properly credited on another person's site.
There are artists that give redistribution rights and then cry if their files end up on another site, properly credited and linked back to their site.
They have an attitude that their work was "stolen".
It is as if those authors and artists think that creative commons badge they have on their site is just something cool to look at and has no other meaning to them. It's just a decoration to them, like a clock that always shows the same time.
I think in your case, either remove the copyscape banner, or place it on an information page and link the creative commons badge to that info page (and include a link to the actual CC license on that page).
Then you have plenty of space to explain your intentions.
You can still check up on people through copyscape, but it is unnecessary to use a badge clearly meant for sites that have no CC license intentions.
Cranial wrote "I wish authors would think about it seriously and make up their minds before they put the banners on their sites. They can't have it both ways."
They can't make up their minds about it, because these are the people that have little understanding of how CC licensing, or any licensing for that matter, works. In many cases, they have even less understanding of copyright laws.
I have acquaintances who do routinely do this on their photoblogs or sites, and I know that they are clueless. In a lot of cases, it's just another button to stick on the site to make it fancier. Yes, I'm being a bit of an ass here with the "fancy" statement. It's sad but it is true.
I have tried to educate those I know that do this on copyright and licensing but in a lot of cases to no avail.
Post a Comment