[Clipart] incompatible licenced Clipart

[J. Alves]

To draw uploader's attention, maybe it would be good to have a check
box in the upload page saying something like:

"I certify that this image is Public Domain: nobody has any rights
over the image or any of its constituent parts, and anyone can use
this image or any part of it for any purpose desired."

No upload if the box isn't checked. Maybe another choice (radio
button) asking: "Are you the author of this clipart: yes no".

Maybe that would give at least some people pause to think about it for
a second and reconsider, in case they haven't understood yet what PD
means.

J

On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 7:40 PM, Jarod Russel <JarodR at gmx.de> wrote:
> 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 image.
>
> 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 if you get permission
> from the copyright holder.
> Public Domain — Where the work or any of its elements is in the 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> clipart mailing list
> clipart at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/clipart
>
>



-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
João Marcelo Pereira Alves (J) - Genomics, Molecular Phylogeny and Evolution
Dept. Microbiology & Immunology - MCV/VCU - Richmond, VA, USA
f. 1-804-828-3897 / 804-852-1234 - http://bioinfo.lpb.mic.vcu.edu