Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

56079Re: copyright - attribution

Expand Messages
  • Steve Watkins
    Feb 1, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Thanks, I got it totally wrong, cheers for the clarification.

      Maybe I will now realise that my fixation with trying to understand
      all the wording and small detail of these licenses is not very useful
      compared to Jay and otehrs suggestions to do something.

      If I manage to sort my dysfunctional self out and do some creative
      commons animations, do people want them in high res or 320x240?

      Is there a need for any resources that would be a toolkit for creating
      your own animations? Like are all the creative commons smbols already
      available in formats that could be used as masks in video editing
      software and suchlike?

      Is there a good guideline for how many seconds people want cc
      animations to be?

      Are people going to try to do animations for most different license
      types, or just the most commons few?

      Am I right to think we do need to put the creative commons version
      number in the animation for it to be valid?

      Has anybody outside the US condiered the international angle? There
      seem to be regionalised versions of creative commons licenses for
      quite a few countries now, Ive no idea how much this matters, and I
      imagine most US-based hosting services will understandably not be
      catering for every permutation in a hurry?

      There I go, complicating things again with questions, oops

      Steve Elbows
      --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen"
      <solitude@...> wrote:
      >
      > Den 01.02.2007 kl. 09:54 skrev Steve Watkins <steve@...>:
      >
      > > Thanks for the clarification. I find the wording of that to be a bit
      > > odd though - I read it as saying that the stuff labelled (ii) is only
      > > applicable if you mention the 3rd parties to be attributed in your
      > > copyright notice?
      >
      > The stuff marked (ii) only goes to the first semi-colon. It's a
      small part
      > that covers sponsors and the like. When a college professor writes a
      paper
      > he could require sharers to mention his university as a part of the
      > attribution. No big deal.
      >
      > > And that the requirement to include a URL is only
      > > valid if that URI contains the license info for the work?
      >
      > Yes, of course. Makes sense to me. Otherwise you have a dead-end.
      >
      > --
      > Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen
      > <URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ >
      >
    • Show all 7 messages in this topic