On the Subject of Creative Commons…

January 22, 2009 at 10:30 am 4 comments

It turns out someone loves Creative Commons more than me and possibly even more than Norman Rockwell. Here is an excerpt of a party invitation I received recently.

By attending, you grant us co-rights to any pictures taken on our property, including derivative works and reposting under Creative Commons licensing, even for commercial use.

I love it! πŸ™‚


Entry filed under: Creative Commons.

Reference Material: Vicky! American Chestnut Foundation Cameos

4 Comments Add your own

  • 1. chriggy  |  January 22, 2009 at 3:14 pm

    I’m all for creative commons as a means of sharing pictures. In fact, I post all my pictures under creative commons.

    However, I do think attributes that the author has chosen such as no-derivs or non-commercial should be respected, as not doing so really goes against the spirit of creative commons.

  • 2. tgaw  |  January 22, 2009 at 4:58 pm

    Yeah I think I noticed that you had derivatives off of your licensing, but I am still thankful you had Creative Commons, because it allowed me to easily use one of those spiffy color accent pictures in a post!

    I would agree that the author’s wishes should be respected unless they consent otherwise. However I will say while working on this blog, I am absolutely thrilled when I find a Creative Commons picture I adore that allows me to do derivatives as it allows me to splice them together for comparisons. There are so many connections in this world, I love being able to put things side by side to see patterns. If I’m especially excited about a topic, the derivative-friendly licensing means I can publish the post faster. Both of those Brain Coral pictures in my Norman Island post allowed derivatives right off that bat and I adored putting those two images together. All the icosahedron at work allowed derivatives which delighted me as well. The Washington Monument spliced with the Manna Ash was convenient because it allowed the work to be remixed.

    As far as the people who do Copyright their pictures on Flickr or license them Creative Commons without derivatives, I have mailed many of them for permission. I have yet to be declined– which is heartwarming. Almost all of the Snubbed McAfee Knob poses, I had to wait get permission for. Some of the Norman Island pictures were full copyrights. The Two Face Lego man from the Harvey Dent Tree post was licensed without derivatives. These aren’t the only examples, but in those cases, the artists still gave me permission to use it. So just because the licensing says no, doesn’t mean the picture is unattainable. You just have to go to a little extra effort and be patient (being patient is the hardest part) to get permission. I’ve found sometimes by going through the steps of opening a dialog and explaining what you want to do, you snag your blog an additional reader or two. πŸ™‚ I think people are as thrilled and flattered as I am to see their work be shared.

    I personally license all my pictures allowing derivatives. I’m not too familiar with what the concerns would be regarding the work getting remixed? And perhaps you can help shed some light on that. Are people afraid their picture is going to be spliced next to Hilter? Or do they just want to keep abreast of where the picture is being used?

  • 3. chriggy  |  January 22, 2009 at 8:34 pm

    I usually publish mine non-derivs precisely because of the last questions you asked. Not so much spliced next to a picture, as much as having part of a picture cut out and photoshopped into another picture.I don’t need some picture of my head spliced onto a naked girl’s body floating around the internet. If I find one, I’d like to have recourse. If asked, 99% of the time I’ll grant the rights for a deriv. But I’d like to be asked to make the determination. The other reason, is that if I went through the trouble to compose(not photoshop) a picture a certain way, that’s the way I’d like it displayed. Once again, 99% of the time, asking will get a yes response from me.

    As far as non-commercial goes, If someone is going to make money off of my picture, I’d like to be compensated. And even that will be handled on a case by case basis. If you’re putting out a textbook for learning, I’ll probably let you have the picture for free, even if you are making money of of it.

    The most important thing to me is attribution though. Give credit where it’s due. If I find one without attribution(which I have found), a nasty e-mail/comment is usually the respose.

    I can’t speak for others, but for myself who posts under creative commons license, I put restrictions not so much to prevent sharing of the pictures, but to protect from those who would abuse the rights of those pictures if they had no restrictions.

    BTW, I’m giving you the right to deriv any picture of mine. No need to ask for individual ones. Just don’t splice me next to Hitler πŸ™‚

  • 4. tgaw  |  January 22, 2009 at 10:05 pm

    @chriggy – Hahah you actually got me to reflect a little on this on the way to Wal-mart. I mentioned to Ryan Somma that I would be far from thrilled if one of the Zwarte Piet pictures showed up on a KKK site.

    “And right below it, it’ll say, ‘Photo by Vicky TGAW!'” he chimed in.


    But, for now, I think … hope… the good outweighs the risk.

    P.S. Thanks for the preemptive deriv rights! I’ll try not to abuse it. πŸ™‚


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed

Flickr Photos

3D Printed Products


%d bloggers like this: