Help promoting Ubuntu Global Jam

[Leandro Gómez]

2009/9/20 Søren Bredlund Caspersen <soeren.b.c at gmail.com>

> On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 6:47 PM, Greg Grossmeier <greg at grossmeier.net>
> wrote:
> > <quoting name="Søren Bredlund Caspersen" date="2009-09-20" time="11:22:57
> +0200">
> >
>

Hi all,


> >> I don't want to be a pain, and if I'm interpreting the CC-BY-SA
> >> licence wrong, please correct me.
> >
> > I will/would, don't worry :)
>
> Glad to hear it :)
>
> >
> >>
> >> But I don't think a CC-BY-SA license is optimal for these graphics.
> >>
> >> If I understand the license correctly, every blog, forum post, wiki
> >> page etc. including these graphics, need to have a line informing who
> >> made the graphics. I can quickly come up with a hand full, if not
> >> more, pages that do include these graphics, but not the required
> >> attribution.
> >
> > That is correct. And it can be as simple as
> > <link to author's homepage or work>Name</link> <link to
> license>CC:BY-SA</link>
> > Which would look like "Name CC:BY-SA"
> >
> > (excuse the non-standard link notation)
> >
> >>
> >> I don't want to step on anyone's toes, but if the original author of
> >> the graphics felt that was the right license, should we not follow it?
> >
> > We should, as that is the Good Thing (TM) to do.
>
> So, to have a concrete example, the much advertised Global Jam wiki
> page, artwork section:
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuGlobalJam#Artwork
>
> The information right now is:
> "All artwork is CC-BY-SA"
> with no info of who the author actually is or how (s)he would like to
> be attributed.
>

The attribution information is included in the source files.


> That page right now doesn't really live up to the license, does it?
> And really should be fixed? Pleas correct me if I'm wrong.
>
> >> If it was really meant to be used in a way where attribution was not
> >> required, why not choose the right license from the start?
> >
> > There is no CC license (or FSF license) that does not require attribution
> > (ie: they all do). However, I could argue that material like this should
> > have all rights waived (using the CC0 waiver[0], or similar). That way
> > they can be used/adapted most easily and people wouldn't have to worry
> > about adding (possibly ugly) attribution information to an otherwise
> > pretty advertisement/marketing material. But I could also argue that
> > using the copyleft CC license (BY-SA) or attribution only (BY) is correct
> > as those are most analogous to the software licenses used in the
> > community.
>
> The big difference between the license of the software on the one side
> and graphics and posters on the other, is that including a relatively
> small text document with some software doesn't really make
> distribution that much harder. With limited screen / paper space on
> what ever webpage / flyer you may be producing, even a few words about
> the license can become unhandy.
>

If you have limited space, please don't use this graphics. It's as simple as
that... ok... I'm the original author of the artwork, but if I weren't I
would always think the same way:

It doesn't matter if it's code, artwork, literature or music; the author
must always be acknowleged... just because they've made the software, book,
web banner or song available to the public for free, does'nt mean they don't
deserve to be acknowledged for their hard work.

If I follow your logic correctly, we should be removing all the copyright
notices from the software we use, because it takes more disk space and can
become unhandy.

I don't want to be harsh, but if you're not going to respect the license, do
your own artwork and publish it as PD or CC0.

Cheers,


>
> The loco mailing list may not be the right forum for it, but maybe
> there needs to be a general discussion of what license to use for
> marketing material? Or it has already been had, and I have missed it?
>
> Cheers
> Søren
>
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Greg
> >
> >
> > [0] http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
> >
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >> Søren
> >>
> >> 2009/8/21 Leandro Gómez <leo.telsen at gmail.com>:
> >> > 2009/8/21 Jono Bacon <jono at ubuntu.com>
> >> >>
> >> >> On 08/21/2009 12:10 PM, Leandro Gómez wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >     Corrales to weave his magic? ;-)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Yes indeed! Would anyone like to do these? Adolfo, could you ask
> Byron
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Made some badges based on Byron's artwork... threw in a couple of
> web
> >> >> > banners as well... download (including sources) here:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > http://www.mediafire.com/?gii7ghtym1y
> >> >>
> >> >> Those images look awesome! Good you attach them and add them to
> >> >> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuGlobalJam - thanks!*
> >> >
> >> > Done! :)
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> *
> >> >>     Jono
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Jono Bacon
> >> >> Ubuntu Community Manager
> >> >> www.ubuntu.com / www.jonobacon.org
> >> >> www.identi.ca/jonobacon www.twitter.com/jonobacon
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> loco-contacts mailing list
> >> >> loco-contacts at lists.ubuntu.com
> >> >> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/loco-contacts
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > loco-contacts mailing list
> >> > loco-contacts at lists.ubuntu.com
> >> > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/loco-contacts
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> --
> >> loco-contacts mailing list
> >> loco-contacts at lists.ubuntu.com
> >> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/loco-contacts
> >
> > --
> > loco-contacts mailing list
> > loco-contacts at lists.ubuntu.com
> > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/loco-contacts
> >
>
> --
> loco-contacts mailing list
> loco-contacts at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/loco-contacts
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/loco-contacts/attachments/20090920/7fc09279/attachment-0002.htm