<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Jon; So in terms of these two questions, what do you think is the
better way forward?<br>
> The first is here.
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.freedesktop.org/pipermail/clipart/2010-June/010730.html"
target="_blank">http://lists.freedesktop.org/pipermail/clipart/2010-June/010730.html</a>,
self-explanatory.<br>
><br>
> The second is
here.<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.freedesktop.org/pipermail/clipart/2010-June/010731.html"
target="_blank">http://lists.freedesktop.org/pipermail/clipart/2010-June/010731.html</a>.
Part
of the question is "If a site claims it's 'clipart' to be PD, can
they put restrictions on those clipart, like "You can not upload this
to a competitive venture." Is their statement, legally invalid, and is
it still ok to take their clipart and put it on our site, especially if
they use a different format. "<br>
> Please read the entire thread so that you know where we are up to
in the discussion.<br>
<br>
Do we continue to allow clipart uploads from freeclipartnow, with the
understanding that FCN uses only jpg's, we use svg's, They may be just
a mining site, we are an actual library, the exception phrase is not a
valid phrase to be used on PD clipart, and we carry on, and IF a
takedown notice request come in, we follow it up then, and only then?<br>
<br>
OR <br>
<br>
Do we not allow cliparts from that site to be uploaded, to build up the
"trust" level of OCAL's users?<br>
<br>
(I hope you've read all the emails regarding this thread! There's lots
of info in it!)<br>
<br>
Cheers<br>
Chovynz<br>
<br>
On 17/06/2010 1:04 p.m., Jon Phillips wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:AANLkTilXp0E9aOQBI06X32HxtTcejgoNrKNop3nZidh3@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Nathan is a good friend of mine. He is a right on.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>PD means no restrictions whatsoever. So, if someone puts some
crap language around something saying "You can use this for any reason
except if you are from USA." That is no longer in the public domain.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>As I've always said, if in doubt, throw it out.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>But, I'm also not paranoid either...since our servers are in the
USA, we have the DMCA safe harborprovisions which give us 24-36 hours
to be notified of and to act upon the request for a takedown.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>What we need is to put some DMCA procedure on the site, in the
footer somewhere like: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://creativecommons.org/policies/">http://creativecommons.org/policies/</a>
and </div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://creativecommons.org/dmca/">http://creativecommons.org/dmca/</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thoughts?<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 5:23 AM, chovynz <span
dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:chovynz@gmail.com">chovynz@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">Hi Guys, please remember to
"reply to all" or put the mailing list in
the replies. :) I've had two replies so far which would be better on
the mailing list than to me directly.<br>
<br>
Here's a reply from a chap at Creative Commons to the discussions we've
had. Start from the bottom up.<br>
<br>
Cheers<br>
Choyvnz<br>
<br>
-------- Original Message --------
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap">Subject: </th>
<td>Re: A comment from Chovynz</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap">Date: </th>
<td>Wed, 16 Jun 2010 17:04:56 -0400</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap">From: </th>
<td>Nathan Kinkade <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:nkinkade@creativecommons.org" target="_blank"><nkinkade@creativecommons.org></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap">To: </th>
<td><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:chovynz@gmail.com"
target="_blank">chovynz@gmail.com</a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap">CC: </th>
<td><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:info@creativecommons.org" target="_blank">info@creativecommons.org</a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
Hi,<br>
<br>
I have to state up front that, as Tobias stated for you on the list,<br>
neither am I lawyer. I have been answering questions like this for a<br>
long time, but none of it should be taken for fact or legal advice.<br>
Also, CC isn't a license law firm and isn't able to provide legal<br>
advice. What I can do is to give you my take on the matter based on<br>
how I understand things to work.<br>
<br>
First thread:<br>
<br>
CC0 is not a license; it is more like a waiver or badge of intent.<br>
It's an important distinction. CC0 should be used by copyright<br>
holders who would like to waive as many rights as applicable law<br>
allows. The PD document should be used by people who want to tag or<br>
mark public domain works they find as being in the public domain to<br>
the best of their knowledge. I don't think someone should be tagging<br>
a public domain work with a CC0 badge. Instead, I think the PD badge<br>
is more appropriate:<br>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/" target="_blank">http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/</a><br>
<br>
Second thread:<br>
<br>
I couldn't read the whole thing, sorry. It's just too long, and we<br>
are too few at CC. I scanned it, though, and really the matter comes<br>
down to this: risk assessment. If they published something on their<br>
site and *say* that it's "public domain," except for this that and the<br>
other thing, how will that stand up in court, which is all that really<br>
matters at the end of the day? If they tell you to take it down, you<br>
do. If they sue you, it's another matter. Likewise, it's another<br>
matter if someone uses it from OCAL then gets sued by the people who<br>
own it. Their claim that it is public domain, but with some<br>
exceptions, may just be a semantic difference. Maybe what they mean<br>
to say is: "This is *practically* public domain, but respect these few<br>
things. My only advice is to simply contact that site for<br>
clarification, if you haven't already.<br>
<br>
This may not be a satisfactory answer, but there is no other, really,<br>
except for giving out opinions. When all is said and done, what<br>
anyone says, lawyer or not, means nothing unless they have the<br>
opportunity to argue and win their point in a court before a judge.<br>
This is why I say it's about risk assessment. Are you prepared to<br>
take the chance that they will sue you or some user of OCAL.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
<br>
Nathan<br>
<br>
<br>
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Creative Commons<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:info@creativecommons.org"
target="_blank"><info@creativecommons.org></a> wrote:<br>
> A new submission (form: "Contact")<br>
> ============================================<br>
> Submitted on: June 16, 2010<br>
> Via: /<br>
> By 118.92.181.42 (visitor IP).<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> -----------------------------------------------------------<br>
><br>
> Name: Chovynz<br>
> Email: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:chovynz@gmail.com" target="_blank">chovynz@gmail.com</a><br>
> Subject:: General information<br>
> Website: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://openclipart.org/" target="_blank">http://openclipart.org/</a><br>
><br>
> Message:<br>
> I am a Librarian for Open Clipart Library. We use the Public
Domain Waiver for our clipart.<br>
><br>
> I have two questions that I would really really appreciate you
guys taking some time to answer.<br>
><br>
> The first is here.
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.freedesktop.org/pipermail/clipart/2010-June/010730.html"
target="_blank">http://lists.freedesktop.org/pipermail/clipart/2010-June/010730.html</a>,
self-explanatory.<br>
><br>
> The second is
here.<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.freedesktop.org/pipermail/clipart/2010-June/010731.html"
target="_blank">http://lists.freedesktop.org/pipermail/clipart/2010-June/010731.html</a>.
Part
of the question is "If a site claims it's 'clipart' to be PD, can
they put restrictions on those clipart, like "You can not upload this
to a competitive venture." Is their statement, legally invalid, and is
it still ok to take their clipart and put it on our site, especially if
they use a different format. "<br>
> Please read the entire thread so that you know where we are up to
in the discussion.<br>
><br>
> Where does legality, and ethics come into this?<br>
><br>
> Thank you for your time. Please feel free to email me any answer,
and I'll upload it to the mailing list.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
</div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
clipart mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:clipart@lists.freedesktop.org">clipart@lists.freedesktop.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/clipart"
target="_blank">http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/clipart</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<br>
-- <br>
Jon Phillips<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://rejon.org/">http://rejon.org/</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://fabricatorz.com/">http://fabricatorz.com/</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://status.net/">http://status.net/</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://rejon.status.net">http://rejon.status.net</a>
+ skype: kidproto<br>
+1.415.830.3884 (sf/global)<br>
+86.187.1003.9974 (china)<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>