[Clipart] incompatible licenced Clipart

Jarod Russel JarodR at gmx.de
Mon Jun 14 16:40:32 PDT 2010

Lets say you have made an image of a beach with the ocean, sand, an 
umbrella and a beachball. You made all elements of this image yourself 
except for the beachball. The beachball is a public domain image you 
integrated in your work. Now your beach image as one work has the cc 
by-nc-sa license. The beachball alone however is not affected by this 
license it is still in the public domain. Meaning I can take the 
beachball and use it for my own images but I can't use the whole beach 

The cliparts you've mentioned are simply incompatible with OCAL and need 
to be deleted. The uploaders have not understood or not read that the 
images need to be pd for ocal.

Am 15-Jun-10 07:14 AM, schrieb chovynz:
> *Clipart I've hidden*
> Has CC [nc-by-sa] licence. This is incompatible with PD.
> http://www.openclipart.org/index.php?pretty=detail/66565
> http://www.openclipart.org/index.php?pretty=detail/66553
> http://www.openclipart.org/index.php?pretty=detail/66559
> http://www.openclipart.org/detail/66643
> This real-life example shows why it's better to not allow any other 
> licences except for PD.
> Although I do have a question about our policy.
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/
> The licence states that No-Commercial use is applied. However the 
> conditions of the licence say thus:
>       With the understanding that:
>     * *Waiver* — Any of the above conditions can be waived
>       <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/#> if you get
>       permission from the copyright holder.
>     * *Public Domain* — Where the work or any of its elements is in
>       the public domain
>       <http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Public_domain> under applicable
>       law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
> The Uploader for OCAL isn't necessarily the Author, but most often IS. 
> Simply put, we have no way of knowing yet. For the purposes of 
> simplicity let's say that the Uploader IS the Author of the works.
> Does it mean, when the Author of the works, uploading it to our PD 
> site, uses that 2nd point, in that the /NC part is cancelled/ because 
> of uploading the entirety of the clipart to the Public Domain OCAL?
> Obviously, I can assume that the persons actual intent (I have to 
> assume, since we don't yet have email facilities to ask directly, hint 
> hint), is for people to not use it commercially. Otherwise they would 
> not have put it in there under NC.
> Which is correct? That understanding clause is confusing.
> 1. Is the Authors own works, uploaded to OCAL, to be considered PD, no 
> matter what licence they state on the description?
> 2. Or is it to be considered incompatible, and removed from the library?
> My understanding is 2. is correct at this time.
> _______________________________________________
> clipart mailing list
> clipart at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/clipart

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/clipart/attachments/20100615/2a79209a/attachment.html>

More information about the clipart mailing list