Stephanie Daugherty wrote:
IANAL, but this shouldn't be an issue except
possibly in print, because
unlike text, images are a single file that will at most be reuploaded,
and the only thing that would be a "derivative work" would be another
image based on the original one. Therefore, the text of an article using
CC-BY-SA images wouldn't have to be covered under that license, but
anywhere where the image wasn't a discrete component (ie, print, or any
format that distributes the entire pages as images (PDF?) it might apply.
That is one possible interpretation of the current license, but I'm
responding to Erik's proposal that the cc-by-sa license be changed to
explicitly say that aggregating an image with text makes the resulting
illustrated text a derivative work of the image.