[Clipart] Copyright clipart

[Bill Kendrick]

On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 02:01:46PM +0900, Jarod Russel wrote:
> If you wanna do different licenses I suggest to add only those who are 
> very close to pd. Otherwise if you add creative commons for example, 
> people will not add proper terms...is it free for commercial use? is it 
> not? or is it ok to use it for commercial flyers and websites as long as 
> I don't make money of that image. There will be more confusion in the 
> end then the whole thing would be useful.
<snip>

There's also remixing, in which case one would need to make sure that
the remixed work doesn't claim a license that's incompatible.
(e.g., take something that's CC-whatever, remix it or alter it, and
then claim that their version is PD, when it simply cannot be.)

This is something I thought about when I started designing (the
currently undeveloped) Tux Paint raw stamps system.  (Purpose being
for us to amass a collection of unfinished content, and volunteers
can slowly work on it over time, preparing it for use in Tux Paint
as stamps -- needs to be cropped and have background replaced with
alpha transparency, for example.)

If someone uploads a License X photo, then the stamp that gets
created from it must be License X or Y, but not License Z or
Public Domain.

If someone uploads a Public Domain photo, then the stamp can be
any License (X, Y or Z), or Public Domain.

The plan is to have some kind of "license {X} can be
derived from source material that is license {1, 2, 3...N}" logic
in the code, and the actual rules stored in the database.


This kind of "fun" stuff is part of the reason I haven't gotten
anywhere with this project yet. ;)

-bill!