On Aug 25, 2007, at 21:22 , Matthew Brown wrote:
The one thing I'm concerned about about is the statement that attribution could be changed to Wikipedia with a change to terms of service. I'm puzzled by that. If I'm not the one uploading a CC-licensed image, how have I as an original Author or Licensor designated another party for attribution? If that's true, then the attribution requirement means very much less than what I thought it meant.
I think that you or the person stating that is mistaken. Even text contributions to Wikipedia do not require assignment of copyright to Wikimedia/Wikipedia. They are all copyright their original contributors. This definitely goes for images as well.
It was stated by Gregory Maxwell. It didn't match my world view, nor my understanding of the CC, but then I'm prepared to be wrong about a lot of things vis-a-vis my understanding of the CC right about now.
Here's the snip:
On Aug 25, 2007, at 15:48 , Gregory Maxwell wrote:
We are in full conformance with the attribution requirements of CC-By. Under these licenses you have waved the ability to specify the exact character of attribution.
Furthermore under CC-by-*-2.5 and later, with a change to our sites terms of service we could instead provide attribution to ourselves, rather than you, for CC-by images uploaded to us.
"reasonable to the medium or means You are utilizing: (i) the name of the Original Author (or pseudonym, if applicable) if supplied, and/or (ii) if the Original Author and/or Licensor designate another party or parties (e.g. a sponsor institute, publishing entity, journal) for attribution in Licensor's copyright notice, terms of service or by other reasonable means,"
We wouldn't do that. But don't claim that we are not in conformance with the Creative Commons Attribution license.