On Aug 25, 2007, at 21:22 , Matthew Brown wrote:
The one thing
I'm concerned about about is the statement that
attribution
could be changed to Wikipedia with a change to terms of service.
I'm puzzled
by that. If I'm not the one uploading a CC-licensed image, how
have I as an
original Author or Licensor designated another party for
attribution? If
that's true, then the attribution requirement means very much less
than what
I thought it meant.
I think that you or the person stating that is mistaken. Even text
contributions to Wikipedia do not require assignment of copyright to
Wikimedia/Wikipedia. They are all copyright their original
contributors. This definitely goes for images as well.
It was stated by Gregory Maxwell. It didn't match my world view, nor
my understanding of the CC, but then I'm prepared to be wrong about a
lot of things vis-a-vis my understanding of the CC right about now.
Here's the snip:
On Aug 25, 2007, at 15:48 , Gregory Maxwell wrote:
We are in full conformance with the attribution
requirements of CC-By.
Under these licenses you have waved the ability to specify the exact
character of attribution.
Furthermore under CC-by-*-2.5 and later, with a change to our sites
terms of service we could instead provide attribution to ourselves,
rather than you, for CC-by images uploaded to us.
"reasonable to the medium or means You are utilizing: (i) the name of
the Original Author (or pseudonym, if applicable) if supplied, and/or
(ii) if the Original Author and/or Licensor designate another party or
parties (e.g. a sponsor institute, publishing entity, journal) for
attribution in Licensor's copyright notice, terms of service or by
other reasonable means,"
We wouldn't do that. But don't claim that we are not in conformance
with the Creative Commons Attribution license.