On Tuesday 08 April 2008 21:05:40 geni wrote:
On 08/04/2008, Nikola Smolenski
<smolensk(a)eunet.yu> wrote:
First, I
don't think that my work deserves to influence other,
unrelated
work; especially as I personally do employ fair
use when I can and
don't think that I should request more stringent criteria in regard
to my work.
Fair use would not and cannot be impacted by any license.
...which has nothing to do with what I said.
Really? "as I personally do employ fair use" " don't think that I
should request more stringent criteria in regard to my work".
Yes, really. Perhaps I should clarify: fair use does not require that I
release my work under the same conditions as the work I am fairly using;
therefore I think I shouldn't request such a thing in a free license of my
work.
Second, I
don't want to release my work under CC-BY because I do
want enhancements to my work to be freely reusable.
A newspaper article includeing your work may well be an enhancement.
Actually, it would rather be the other way around (unless the article is
about my work).
Define "about your work".
I believe it is obvious to everyone.
Okey so you think newspaper articles would be
overkill. So what if all
someone does is add a caption? What if your work is used as part of a
Collage? What if it is used as part of a flow chart? Where do you draw
the line?
I do not draw the line.
Then you cannot object to where other draw it.
Yes I can. I just did.
I am aware that
there are use cases that are
inbetween. Yet most of the cases fall in two clearly separate
categories: one for which I do want the enhancement to my work to be
freely reusable, and one for which I am content with my work illustrating
an unrelated work.
Meaningless since you will not define which is which.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum_fallacy
No, they are
in fact rather above it. A GFDL image does not require that
you release text that includes it under GFDL.
RMS would appear to differ which is a bit of a problem since even if
you did manage to win a court case (which I doubt) RMS can change the
license so you wouldn't in future.
Link?
In any case the requirement to release a work under a
free license is
pretty minor compared to the requirement to include a full copy of the
license and an interesting set of disclaimers.
No, in most cases it is a much more restrictive requirement.