Just to remind you: if you own the copyright on the photographs you are in no way required to mention Wikimedia Commons or the license of your photographs, because they are non-exclusive. You can re-release your photographs under any license you want (including commercial non-distributable licenses). Of course, if you want to mention Commons / the license, that's really cool. I don't know how long the credit may be, but maybe something like this: "Photographs on pages X, X, X by Rama Rama. Released under License X. Distributed by Wikimedia Commons: http://commons.wikimedia.org" -- Hay / Husky On 10/24/07, Rama Rama <ramaneko(a)gmail.com> wrote:

Rama, you may wish to start by changing either your first or last names. Maybe both. sincerely Wendell Tomlin, USA ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rama Rama" <ramaneko(a)gmail.com> To: <Commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 7:27 AM Subject: [Commons-l] Credits in books

The author mentioned that he'd be comfortable with the CC-by licence, but requests explicit autorisation in the case of the CC-by-sa licence. I reckon that this is because it's not clear whether the whole book would be considered to be a derivative work of the image or not (I think that it's obviously not the case, but it's only my opinion and others think otherwise). For the credit line, it depends on where credits are given. On a "photographic credits" page, it's easy because lots of space is available. Immediately under a photograph, the credit line should be concise (which is why CC-by-sa works much better than the GFDL in this case). Hence my question: the thing should be informative, advertise Commons efficiently, yet be non-intrusive and concise. Something like "(c) Foobar, Cc-by-sa, Wikimedia Commons" "Photograph Foobar (Wikimedia Commons), Cc-by-sa" "Photo Foobar, pub. Wikimedia Commons, Cc-by-sa" ...

In most newspapers and magazines the format is usually: 'FORMAT: PHOTOGRAPHER / AGENCY' E.g.: 'Photo: Peter Photographer / Reuters' For Commons photos we might use the format: 'FORMAT: PHOTOGRAPHER / Wikimedia Commons / LICENSE' E.g. 'Photo: Rama Rama / Wikimedia Commons / CC-BY' -- Hay / Husky On 10/24/07, Daniel Schwen <lists(a)schwen.de> wrote:

On 24/10/2007, Magnus Manske <magnusmanske(a)googlemail.com> wrote: [[Commons:Reusing content outside Wikimedia]] does 1. For 2., we might add example credits in each case. - d.

On 25/10/2007, Rama Rama <ramaneko(a)gmail.com> wrote: I asked the FSF specifically about what constitutes "the larger work", and (as noted in the FAQ) they said ask a lawyer if in doubt. We really can't give any better advice than that. - d.

On 25/10/2007, Brianna Laugher <brianna.laugher(a)gmail.com> wrote: Not a good idea. Apart from anything else the most obvious targets would be the various wikimedia projects and the FSF. -- geni

Today I say that one of my photographs had been published in the French edition of "Scientific American" ("Pour la Science" in French), without the licence (nor my knowledge, for that matter). I'll end up wondering if our page on how to use the images is understandable... -- Rama

On 30/10/2007, Rama Rama <ramaneko(a)gmail.com> wrote: Fair use? Brianna -- They've just been waiting in a mountain for the right moment: http://modernthings.org/