[Foundation-l] Fwd: Share-Alike with images

[Stephanie Daugherty]

Delirium wrote:
> Erik Moeller wrote:
>
>   
>> The simple fact is that a photo by itself is not likely to be modified
>> much, especially if it's of very high quality to begin with. That's
>> why I think it's important that we establish a clear and unambiguous
>> reciprocity when images are used in larger works. Perhaps the
>> movie-specific phrase in the current SA license text could be
>> generalized:
>>
>> "For the avoidance of doubt, where the Work is semantically combined
>> with another (a film with time-synchronized music, an article with
>> pictures, and so on), the combined Work will be considered a
>> Derivative Work for the purpose of this license."
>>  
>>
>>     
>
> This would be problematic for our own uses unless the CC-BY-SA / GFDL 
> compatibility issues are resolved.  The wording of the cc-by-sa requires 
> any derivative works to be distributed "only under a license identical 
> to this one", but our own encyclopedia is licensed under a non-identical 
> license, the GFDL.  So we wouldn't be able to use CC-BY-SA images within 
> Wikipedia under that license change, unless they're dual-licensed under 
> the GFDL as well...
>
> -Mark
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>   
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.

Legal counsel could probably advise further on this, but I don't think 
it's too big of a deal.

-Stephanie