World Wide Panorama mailing list archive

Mailinglist:wwp@yahoogroups.com
Sender:Yuval Levy
Date/Time:2008-May-22 13:40:00
Subject:Creative Commons (was Re: Do these views looks the same????)

Thread:


wwp@yahoogroups.com: Creative Commons (was Re: Do these views looks the same????) Yuval Levy 2008-May-22 13:40:00
Robert Bilsland wrote:
> Well make your own mind up. 

they indeed look the same to me.

BUT

could it be that the person pointing the laser was surfing the web at 
the time the movie was shot? several of the clips looks like he was 
navigating GoogleEarth (AFAIK works only when it can connect to the 
server) and using Internet Explorer.

If I understand correctly their request, they can already view via the 
web, and they would like permission to cache the data on their own 
server, just to improve the user experience. Imagine the public, waiting 
for a slow download...

Also this is a screencast. Are screenshots and screencast of our work 
permitted?

Bruno asked me when he posted 
<http://www.flickr.com/photos/#removed#/2307900843/>, but I think in 
the U.S. it would probably be considered fair use. Other countries do 
not know fair use provisions.

And if screenshots, then screencasts? they only show small parts of the 
work and are a completely different work in their own right. The 
impression I have is that the youtube movie is a screencast - the screen 
of an internet-connected PC was projected, and captured by the video. 
Note that the video is edited, so they may have conveniently edited out 
the loading time.

And here's another case: what if I set up an internet connected PC with 
a projector in a conference room and make a "live presentation"? I still 
have the risk of the internet connection breaking down or the server not 
being available, but those are all technicalities.

In legal terms, we are talking re-transmission / broadcasting. In 
Switzerland (and probably in other countries as well), businesses that 
play radio to their clients must pay extra licensing fees.

When I contribute something to the WWP, I do so with the knowledge that 
it becomes accessible to the general public. As long as it is used in a 
respectful context and with due credit, I'm happy with it being showed 
all over the place.

I find the approach of ZKM everything else but respectful. It is 
chaotic, not to say arrogant, to assume consent to something that 
requires permission.

But I find the intended use very respectful and positive.

Maybe *we* should make such use easier, rather than insisting 
bureaucratically on outdated locked down procedures?

Maybe we should consider changing licenses and moving from an "all 
rights reserved" to a more permissive, non-commercial use license like 
<http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/> ?

Yuv

Next thread:

Previous thread:

back to search page