On 08/04/2008, Nikola Smolenski <smolensk(a)eunet.yu> wrote:
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;
Actually it does. It requires that you release it under US law.
> 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.
Define it or withdraw it.
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.
Yes but your objections have no value.
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
Okey I acknowledge there are grey areas. I deal with grey areas all
the time. However I gave you a list of partical real world examples.
If you are unable to sort them then your position is useless.
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.
You cannot at this time realistically include a GFDL image in the new
scientist. You can include a copyleft article in the new scientist.
--
geni