Help promoting Ubuntu Global Jam

[Greg Grossmeier]

Hi all, sorry for my late response. Comments inline.

<quoting name="Niels Kjøller Hansen" date="2009-09-22" time="09:02:56 +0200">

> man, 21 09 2009 kl. 22:57 +0200, skrev Leandro Gómez:
> > 2009/9/21, Søren Bredlund Caspersen <soeren.b.c at gmail.com>:
> > > 2009/9/21 Leandro Gómez <leo.telsen at gmail.com>:
> > >> 2009/9/20 Søren Bredlund Caspersen <soeren.b.c at gmail.com>
> 
> <SNIP>
> 
> > >> I understand the license this way:
> > >>
> > >> If you're using the graphics for promoting the event, it's ok to not
> > >> attribute the author. It's the UGJ we're promoting and there's no need to
> > >> link to the authors site.
> > >>
> > >> But, if you're distributing the artwork or making derivated use of it,
> > >> then
> > >> you must attribute.
> > >
> > > Can someone please confirm this? If you use these graphics to promote
> > > the event, you don't have to live up to the license requirement of
> > > attribution? Can there be made this kind of exceptions from the CC
> > > license?
> > 
> > >From the CC website:
> > 
> > "If the work itself contains any copyright notices placed there by the
> > copyright holder, you must leave those notices in tact, or reproduce
> > them in a way that is reasonable to the medium in which you are
> > re-publishing the work."
> > 
> > The work itself (the .png graphic) doesn't contain any copyright
> > notice, so IMHO you're not violating the license.
> > 
> > http://wiki.creativecommons.org/FFAQ#How_do_I_properly_attribute_a_Creative_Commons_licensed_work.3F
> > 
> 
> As I read it, the five bulletpoints on the linked FAQ-entry has an
> implied AND in it. So just because the work doesn't contain a copyright
> notice, it doesn't forego any attribution.

That is correct. You must always give attribution to an author according 
to ANY of the CC licenses.

> According to the CC-BY-SA license, every redistribution (even displaying
> the button on your webpage) must be accompanied by the authors name and
> a link to the license.

Yep, see above.

> However, the author IS allowed to grant every exception he or she likes.
> So if the author thinks that "If you're using the graphics for promoting
> the event, it's ok to not attribute the author.", then this is a
> legitimate exception.

Correct, but those kinds of exceptions, as they are not a part of the 
license, lead to confusion/only some people knowing about it, which you 
say below...

> 
> But my point is that this is NOT implicit in the license and HAS to be
> stated by the author in order to be applicable. So instead of each user
> of the work should have to dig through this mailing list, stating this
> exception on the wiki-page would be benificial.

I agree that the author stating their additional exceptions everywhere 
they post it is helpful, and needed practically.


So, in sum: the CC licenses say to always give attribution (otherwise 
you're plagarizing anyways, which isn't copyright infringement, but it 
is still "Not Cool"), but any author can state that they don't care about 
certain things. But doing so muddies the waters of what someone can and 
can't do with their work.

All the best,

Greg


Note: I work for Creative Commons but I am NOT A LAWYER.