[Foundation-l] Let's switch to CC-BY-SA

[Anthony]

On 9/13/07, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
> Anthony wrote:
> > On 9/13/07, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
> >
> >> The short answer is that nobody knows. It depends on whether an article
> >> containing an image is a "derivative work" of the image. The FSF takes
> >> the position that it is; the Creative Commons folk take the position
> >> that it isn't; neither position has ever been tested in a court.
> >>
> >>
> > You must be misexplaining the question, because it's quite obvious
> > that an article containing an image is a "derivative work" of the
> > image.  I seriously doubt the Creative Commons folk take the position
> > that it isn't.
> >
>
> IIRC, the Creative Commons folk take the position that publishing two
> works alongside each other is merely aggregation and doesn't create a
> derivative. I don't know if this is an Official Position, but it's the
> consensus on their mailing lists, and I recall it coming up on this list
> before (anyone have a better pointer?). It seems that they even think
> that the case of synchronizing music to video is unclear enough to be
> worth including specific license text about, despite that example being
> much more entangled than publishing an image alongside an article is.
>
It seems awfully strange to me that CC would care about whether or not
something "creates a derivative", as the license explicitly provides
for "collections" which do not count as "adaptations".

The exact wording of what they've said is key, so it's important to
see it rather than go by memory.