[Foundation-l] Clickable images

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
Thank you for selective snipping, in this way a solution to your long 
argument was removed. To recapitulate, we can have options for under the 
left mouse click. Think solutions please.
Thanks,
   GerardM

Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On 9/9/06, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> [snip]
>   
>> By the way if anything your argument
>> is an argument against images that can not be freely displayed and copied.
>>     
>
> A requirement for attribution is not a prohibition against free use
> and redistribution.
>
> Attribution, by itself, is a basic activity which any honest and
> ethical distributor will be careful to perform with due care even when
> not required to by copyright licenses.
>
> So long as the default state of copyright is all rights reserved
> mandatory attribution is a fundamental requirement for any license
> which attempts to use copyright to prevent content from being removed
> from the commons. If the attribution and at least basic licensing
> information are not brought along with the work it becomes far too
> likely that the information will be lost and the work will fall out of
> availability to the public.
>
> The attribution and licensing data provided one click away already
> causes us a little resistance from some photographers who would rather
> see a distracting by-line attached to every illustration of theirs.
> What we do today is uniform on all of our pages (with a few
> exceptions, for example the frwiki main page), and is consistent with
> our behavior for text. It is likely the minimal acceptable thing we
> can do both from both the perspective of license conformance and from
> the perspective of behaving honestly. Hiding the attribution behind
> multiclick secret handshakes just isn't going to fly.
>
> I think it is important that we keep any discussion centered on the
> actual problem: Our image behavior is surprising when we use images as
> parts of navigational elements.  This isn't an issue over free
> content, and any attempt to turn the discussion into a crusade to
> establish a new (and ultimately self defeating) definition of free
> content is just going to be a waste of all our time.
>