On 11/11/07, Steve Summit <scs(a)eskimo.com> wrote:
Personally (and I hope I'm not sounding snide here, I'm honestly
not trying to be) I feel that a license that requires attribution
is not really a free license, in the same way that fair-use and
use-by-permission are not free licenses.
That's a reasonable point of view. If most people agree, then we
should not use those images. We can't have it both ways: use free
images that require attribution, then not really attribute them
properly.
Certainly, we should attribute images where it's convenient to do
so (e.g., at the very least, on the image page). But
if we feel
compelled to bend over backwards to do something more, or worse,
if we permit attribution-required licensors to compel us to bend
over backwards, it seems to me we're denying ourselves precisely
the same freedom we attempt to ensure ourselves by disallowing
fair use and used-with-permission.
Yep. IMHO a "credit: Mr Foo" in the caption is not bending over backwards.
Other peole have indicated that that's too much, and they'd prefer an
aggregated list of
credits at the bottom of the page. That's reasonable too.
Steve