Hello everyone
I have a question about the licence at
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Pink_Sponge_isolated_o…
There is a general self|cc-by-sa-4.0|attribution= template displaying, in
part
This file is licensed under the Creative Commons
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:Creative_Commons> Attribution-Share Alike
4.0 International <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.en>
license.
- *attribution* – You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to
the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any
reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses
you or your use.
- If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute
the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this one.
However, there is also a bespoke declaration
A statement such as "From Wikimedia Commons" or similar is *not* by itself
sufficient. If you do not provide clear attribution to the author and
indicate the file name as shown here, you didn't comply with the terms of
the file's license and may not use this file. If you are unable or
unwilling to provide attribution and *release your own work* that incorporates
this work <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Derivative_works> with
a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 license you should
contact Jonatan
Svensson Glad <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Josve05a> to
negotiate a different license.
These declarations are incompatible in two respects. Firstly, the
attribution requirements are different, and secondly the reuse conditions
are different, replacing "build upon" with "incorporate" -- these are
clearly different, and indeed if they are not different, why would the
uploader have written a different one for themselves?
Anyway, given the incompatibility between the two declarations, should this
file be on Commons at all?
JPS
