Poll: Which language should I learn?

+ Post New Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 48
Coding Thread, Perl or Python? in Coding and Web Development; powdarrmonkey: License page: "This means that you are free to copy and reuse any of my drawings (noncommercially) as long ...
  1. #16

    webman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North East England
    Posts
    8,412
    Thank Post
    642
    Thanked 963 Times in 663 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    326
    powdarrmonkey: License page: "This means that you are free to copy and reuse any of my drawings (noncommercially) as long as you tell people where they're from."

    I justify my comment about there being an xkcd for everything to cover that. I'm not going to go off-topic by mentioning the technicalities of hotlinking, the definition of "your website" (their license page), and EduGeek.

  2. #17

    powdarrmonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Alcester, Warwickshire
    Posts
    4,859
    Thank Post
    412
    Thanked 777 Times in 650 Posts
    Rep Power
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by webman View Post
    I justify my comment about there being an xkcd for everything to cover that.
    It is not sufficient.

    Quote Originally Posted by CC-BY-NC
    If you distribute, [...] the Work [... ] You must keep intact all copyright notices for the Work and provide, reasonable to the medium or means You are utilizing: (i) the name of Original Author (or pseudonym, if applicable) if supplied, and/or (ii) if the Original Author and/or Licensor designate another party or parties (e.g. a sponsor institute, publishing entity, journal) for attribution in Licensor's copyright notice, terms of service or by other reasonable means, the name of such party or parties; the title of the Work if supplied; to the extent reasonably practicable, the Uniform Resource Identifier, if any, that Licensor specifies to be associated with the Work, unless such URI does not refer to the copyright notice or licensing information for the Work;
    In this case, Munroe has indicated that an acceptable form of attribution is a link:

    Quote Originally Posted by http://xkcd.com/license.html
    That is, you don't need my permission to post these pictures on your website [...]; just include a link back to this page. [...] You can use them freely (with some kind of link) in not-for-profit publications
    Just accidentally mentioning the name of the comic in passing, with no reference of where to find it, is not IMO acceptable attribution.

  3. #18

    webman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North East England
    Posts
    8,412
    Thank Post
    642
    Thanked 963 Times in 663 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    326
    EduGeek is not my website...

  4. #19

    powdarrmonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Alcester, Warwickshire
    Posts
    4,859
    Thank Post
    412
    Thanked 777 Times in 650 Posts
    Rep Power
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by webman View Post
    EduGeek is not my website...
    So you have even more duty not to bring it into disrepute by contravening licenses.

  5. #20

    webman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North East England
    Posts
    8,412
    Thank Post
    642
    Thanked 963 Times in 663 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    326
    Well that's not my interpretation of the license. I've edited the post - hope that's OK with you.

  6. Thanks to webman from:

    powdarrmonkey (18th August 2010)

  7. #21
    somabc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,337
    Thank Post
    83
    Thanked 388 Times in 258 Posts
    Rep Power
    112
    The licence concerned is Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 Generic which for the UK (English GB) states


    You are free:

    to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work
    to make derivative works
    Under the following conditions:

    Attribution — You must give the original author credit.
    Non-Commercial — You may not use this work for commercial purposes.
    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.
    Other Rights — In no way are any of the following rights affected by the license:
    Your fair dealing or fair use rights, or other applicable copyright exceptions and limitations;

    The author's moral rights;
    Rights other persons may have either in the work itself or in how the work is used, such as publicity or privacy rights.
    Notice — For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the licence terms of this work.
    So a link to xkcd is not valid attribution as xkcd is not the legal author*, you should say Created by Randall Monroe or (c) Randall Monroe etc.

    However I would argue that under fair use you are entitled to embed the comic in this forum under English & Welsh Law.

    (Caveats - I'm not sure where edugeek is hosted but I'm assuming its in England, different jurisdiction may apply, also Randall Monore may have assigned the ownership to an xkcd company in the states which would change the attribution)
    Last edited by somabc; 18th August 2010 at 03:53 PM.

  8. #22
    danbuntu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Maidstone, Kent
    Posts
    304
    Thank Post
    0
    Thanked 55 Times in 52 Posts
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by somabc View Post
    So a link to xkcd is not valid attribution as xkcd is not the legal author*, you should say Created by Randall Monroe or (c) Randall Monroe etc.
    actually that's not so. The XKCD licensing page mentions that you should mention where the source is 'from' - where 'from' is of course the website. In terms of attribution linking to a web site in worth then just a name as with a search on a name you might get the wrong person or have them give up looking for you.

    Indeed if you really wanted to be picky about it you should give both the name and the link to cover both the license and the authors stated wish

    Also see point 4 of: How to Attribute a Creative Commons Licensed Work - wikiHow

  9. #23
    somabc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,337
    Thank Post
    83
    Thanked 388 Times in 258 Posts
    Rep Power
    112
    I'm sorry the xkcd licensing page is only a description of what the Author would like to happen. It has no legal force. The creative commons licence I quoted for the UK is the legal licence and it specifically states that the AUTHOR must be attributed that is all. Fair use trumps the licence conditions anyway. Even if the licence said do not copy this picture at all I could still use it here for the purposes of criticism/review/parody/reporting etc.

    The wikihow page deals with the US Licence and is not relevant.

    Of course if you want to be nice put a link.
    Last edited by somabc; 18th August 2010 at 05:09 PM.

  10. #24

    powdarrmonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Alcester, Warwickshire
    Posts
    4,859
    Thank Post
    412
    Thanked 777 Times in 650 Posts
    Rep Power
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by somabc View Post
    (Caveats - I'm not sure where edugeek is hosted but I'm assuming its in England,
    Germany, actually. If you believe RIPE.

  11. #25
    somabc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,337
    Thank Post
    83
    Thanked 388 Times in 258 Posts
    Rep Power
    112
    Quote Originally Posted by powdarrmonkey View Post
    Germany, actually. If you believe RIPE.
    OK well the German CC License has not been converted for German law, it is simply the US version translated. YMMV

    The relevant authorities could be the UK (where I am) Germany (where edugeek is hosted) or the USA where the copyrighted work currently exists (hot-linked)

  12. #26

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,941
    Thank Post
    519
    Thanked 2,500 Times in 1,941 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    840
    Quote Originally Posted by somabc View Post
    I'm sorry the xkcd licensing page is only a description of what the Author would like to happen. It has no legal force. The creative commons licence I quoted for the UK is the legal licence and it specifically states that the AUTHOR must be attributed that is all. Fair use trumps the licence conditions anyway. Even if the licence said do not copy this picture at all I could still use it here for the purposes of criticism/review/parody/reporting etc.

    The wikihow page deals with the US Licence and is not relevant.

    Of course if you want to be nice put a link.
    As a copyright holder, the owners wishes trump sub-conditions of licenses. ie. if the owner posts 'i'm following the CCbyNC license, but instead of mentioning my name, link to my site' then he has effectively created a new license. There is no difference between a guy listing their own conditions of use, and them using a predefined license. Both are legal. If their wishes are ignored, they have two courses of action - 1. sue for breaching the terms of the license (which, I suppose could be extended to be called copyright infringement), or 2. contact the police and try to get them to initiate a criminal copyright case. Whether they used the CCbyNC or modified it to make it more relevant, that is irrelevant.

    Also, you have a slight misunderstanding of fair use. Fair use is *very* restrictive. You can use it for parody, reporting etc... but we are not doing either here - they're simply posted as adornments, bits of art. Precisely their original intention, and as such they are very much NOT covered by fair use.

  13. Thanks to localzuk from:

    powdarrmonkey (18th August 2010)

  14. #27
    somabc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,337
    Thank Post
    83
    Thanked 388 Times in 258 Posts
    Rep Power
    112
    I would argue that the Licence is not a modified CCbyNC nor is it dual licenced. The words This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 License are clear enough.

    Can I change the terms of a CC license or waive some of its conditions?
    You can change any of our licenses, but if you do so you should know that your modified license is not likely to be compatible with CC’s licenses. Also, if you change our licenses then you cannot say that your work is licensed under a CC license.

    from http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Freq...sked_Questions
    The Licence has to be enforceable and requiring a URL would not be enforceable here, which is why CCbyNC has no mention of it, unlike the USA version which is

    USA

    Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).
    UK
    Attribution — You must give the original author credit.
    The licence must be enforceable in that jurisdiction to have any bearing. For example I could use the hat licence (you must ensure all viewers of the work wear a hat) but that will never be enforced here.
    Last edited by somabc; 18th August 2010 at 09:40 PM.

  15. #28

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,941
    Thank Post
    519
    Thanked 2,500 Times in 1,941 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    840
    Quote Originally Posted by somabc View Post
    I would argue that the Licence is not a modified CCbyNC nor is it dual licenced. The words This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 License are clear enough.

    The Licence has to be enforceable and requiring a URL would not be enforceable here, which is why CCbyNC has no mention of it, unlike the USA version which is

    The licence must be enforceable in that jurisdiction to have any bearing. For example I could use the hat licence (you must ensure all viewers of the work wear a hat) but that will never be enforced here.
    You misunderstand me. The license ceases to be the CCbyNC as soon as the copyright owner says so. What you are saying is that once the person mentions the CCbyNC license, they're stuck with its exact terms - which is nonsense.

    As has been said on the xkcd site, the terms of his license are that the image is under CCbyNC - and his version of that is that a link to xkcd.com is the attribution.

    Really, you do not have the grounds to argue against this, as (I'm assuming) a) you aren't a contract lawyer (you wouldn't be here if you were, you'd be relaxing on a beach with your millions of pounds of income) and b) you are not the copyright holder.

    So, regardless of your individual interpretation of the license there, or whether you deem the license as written there to be enforceable, his license is the CCbyNC license, with the changes he has made to say linking to his site is attribution.

    EDIT: Even the CCbyNC license states what I said above! "Waiver — Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder."

    EDIT 2: The simple page which is linked to is NOT the license by the way - it is simply another simplification of the actual legalese, which clearly states: "You must keep intact all copyright notices for the Work and provide, reasonable to the medium or means You are utilizing: (i) the name of Original Author (or pseudonym, if applicable) if supplied, and/or (ii) if the Original Author and/or Licensor designate another party or parties (e.g. a sponsor institute, publishing entity, journal) for attribution in Licensor's copyright notice".

    So, as the original author, or pseudonym (which one could argue xkcd is as one argument) has stated that xkcd should be linked to, this could be construed as him making xkcd his publishing entity...

    So, whichever way you look at it, its pretty conclusive!
    Last edited by localzuk; 18th August 2010 at 09:54 PM.

  16. #29
    somabc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,337
    Thank Post
    83
    Thanked 388 Times in 258 Posts
    Rep Power
    112
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    You misunderstand me. The license ceases to be the CCbyNC as soon as the copyright owner says so. What you are saying is that once the person mentions the CCbyNC license, they're stuck with its exact terms - which is nonsense.
    No I acknowledged that the author can use any licence they wish but it must have enforceable clauses and if modified it is not CC.

    As has been said on the xkcd site, the terms of his license are that the image is under CCbyNC - and his version of that is that a link to xkcd.com is the attribution.
    The misunderstanding on the site is that CCbyNC in the USA unmodified does exactly what he has said in his licence section however he has not taken account of some of the subtle differences outside the USA. This is to be expected as he is in the USA, the work is in the USA, most of the users are in the USA, obviously he is coming at it from a USA centric viewpoint. So in terms of the USA he has a completely watertight and valid CCbyNC. Not a modified CCbyNA.

    Really, you do not have the grounds to argue against this, as (I'm assuming) a) you aren't a contract lawyer (you wouldn't be here if you were, you'd be relaxing on a beach with your millions of pounds of income) and b) you are not the copyright holder.
    Look none of us are contract lawyers or the copyright owner I just wanted to clarify the situation between bossman and powdarrmonkey. I did not even really think I was saying anything contentious just that strictly speaking you could argue that you do not need a URL underneath an XKCD comic strip.

    So, regardless of your individual interpretation of the license there, or whether you deem the license as written there to be enforceable, his license is the CCbyNC license, with the changes he has made to say linking to his site is attribution.
    CC themselves say such a licence cannot exist and be called CCbyNC. He would be breaking their copyright by insisting it was valid and incorrectly displaying their logo. It would be like saying the licence is GPL except for the changes I have made where you do not need to include the source code. Well then it's not GPL is it.
    Last edited by somabc; 18th August 2010 at 10:01 PM.

  17. #30

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,941
    Thank Post
    519
    Thanked 2,500 Times in 1,941 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    840
    Quote Originally Posted by somabc View Post
    CC themselves say such a licence cannot exist and be called CCbyNA. He would be breaking their copyright by insisting it was valid and incorrectly displaying their logo. It would be like saying the licence is GPL except for the changes I have made where you do not need to include the source code. Well then it's not GPL is it.
    Whether or not the guy is breaking CC's copyright is a completely separate issue. The license would still stand, but the use of the term CCbyNA would be up to the CC people to deal with. A court wouldn't even bring that up.

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. SQL & PERL....
    By acrobson in forum Scripts
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 6th November 2009, 05:19 PM
  2. Perl LDAP problem?
    By localzuk in forum Coding
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 3rd June 2008, 12:31 PM
  3. Perl Moodle framework
    By el8linuxel8 in forum Coding
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 26th March 2008, 12:03 PM
  4. Perl Help
    By danIT in forum Coding
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 1st August 2007, 11:35 AM
  5. Backup Perl Script
    By ranj in forum Scripts
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 30th April 2006, 08:02 PM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •