digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Creative Commons: A Great Concept I’ll Continue to Employ

blog.epicedits.com — Creative Commons - the ins and outs

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Senn, on 11/15/2007, -0/+13I release all my own music under the Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike license, best decision I've ever made in terms of distribution.
  • auer1816, on 11/15/2007, -0/+10It's funny, I'm finding that people either love it, hate it, or have no idea what it is.
  • Akaji, on 11/15/2007, -1/+28I think we should stab bad guys.
  • fishbrush, on 11/15/2007, -10/+4I love creative commons, but also think we should stab the bad guys.
  • JonForTheWin, on 11/15/2007, -5/+9I love Creative Commons, thus I feel we should stab bad guys.
  • theholyraptor, on 04/07/2008, -0/+10Perhaps I should reference a joke also despite the fact that it's been done three times already? Surely it's going to be more funny this time.
  • TheLaughingImp, on 11/15/2007, -0/+5It was nice to see the rebuttal. I dugg it up for that. Creative Commons isn't for everybody, especially control freaks. You know the kind? They put pictures of their art and photos up on the web as backgrounds to tables or with "don't download" flags, but we can screen capture the image anyway? They don't get it that once you put something out on the web you release a bit of control over it. Sounds like the original article cited in this article was written by a paranoid control freak. ;)

    All of my fractal art is not released under CC because I haven't seen a need to do it, though some of my work is. The fractals have just one C stamped on each image. My work is all over the web. As long as people give me credit and a link back I'm good. Having one or two Cs doesn't affect protection. People will steal your work whether you want them to or not. CC is simply supposed to aid creators by letting them dictate terms of usage. That's all it does. For that, CC is really a wonderful step forward.
  • PRlME, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2When I do print work for people i stick that little CC logo on the bottom of the samples. Totally scares them, so i doubt they will go around showing it to other people, or copying my design even if its just a lil (cc).
  • DangerStepp, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2Creative Commons keeps guys like this around: http://youtube.com/watch?v=EwTZ2xpQwpA


    Classic
  • blackmage439, on 11/15/2007, -0/+3I love the idea of being able to circumvent Copyright Law and allow your fans some freedom over using your works. The lack of flexibility like Creative Commons in German copyright law is what killed that Warhammer 40k fan film, which I was extremely disappointed to see happen. (For those who don't know, the copyright owner, Games Workshop, WANTED this film to be released, but copyright law forbade it.)
    • jimsf, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2FYI CC does not circumvent Copyright Law. CC licenses are a specific type of copyright license.
  • thumbtackpress, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1Creative Commons sucks, all it does is give the original author more power over his/her work and remove the need for litigious lawyers... Wait...
    • jimsf, on 11/15/2007, -0/+3Actually its quite the opposite. The author retains the most power over his work with a straight copyright license. But we may have different interpretations of what "power over ones work" is.
  • greyman, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1CC is great idea, but the actual implementation in photography is tougher comparing to open source in software. For example, I may shot a stranger on the street and publish the photo as CC. But if some advertising agency use that photo in an ads campain for example, and the person on the photo finds that out, both I and the agency may get into trouble for the lack of model release.
    So the problem is, that CC doesn't specify how the photo can or can't be used, which may create potential problems. I think the basic concept is good, but it needs to be thought through more thoroughly. ;-)
    • auer1816, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1I agree that there's a gap in the specification for how a photo under CC can be used, but publishers must be held accountable for some things too. Publishers know that model releases are required for commercial use of people in pictures -- I don't think that a CC license should change that fact.
  • DRFighter, on 11/16/2007, -0/+1I think CC rocks! I'm going to start putting a CC license in the footer of my papers for college and see what happens :)
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.