Comments on: Desk Traffic http://www.erik-rasmussen.com/blog/2008/05/14/desk-traffic/ Thoughts and photos from an American living in Spain. Fri, 21 Nov 2008 00:23:17 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc By: Erik R. http://www.erik-rasmussen.com/blog/2008/05/14/desk-traffic/#comment-2488 Erik R. Wed, 14 May 2008 10:05:49 +0000 http://www.erik-rasmussen.com/blog/?p=614#comment-2488 The gist is that if you license your work with the Creative Commons <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" rel="nofollow">Attribution License</a>, you are giving others permission to adapt, modify, and build on your work <b>as long as they give you credit for the original</b> when they republish it. As I understand it, I'm not allowed to actually make money from the sale of the photo above, either. When searching for photos on Flickr, for instance, if you go to "Advanced Search", you have the option of selecting either or both of: A) content to use commercially, or B) content to modify, adapt, or build upon. So, if you want, you can release your photos on Flickr as public domain and let Pepsi make a million-dollar ad from it. Or you can use the Attribution License to let other people use it non-commercially as long as they link to you. From what I can tell, the Attribution License is a win-win situation, as long the rights can be sorted out if someone ever wants to use a byproduct commercially. It's totally unclear what percentage of profit from the image I've created should be given to the original photographer. The gist is that if you license your work with the Creative Commons Attribution License, you are giving others permission to adapt, modify, and build on your work as long as they give you credit for the original when they republish it. As I understand it, I’m not allowed to actually make money from the sale of the photo above, either.

When searching for photos on Flickr, for instance, if you go to “Advanced Search”, you have the option of selecting either or both of: A) content to use commercially, or B) content to modify, adapt, or build upon. So, if you want, you can release your photos on Flickr as public domain and let Pepsi make a million-dollar ad from it. Or you can use the Attribution License to let other people use it non-commercially as long as they link to you.

From what I can tell, the Attribution License is a win-win situation, as long the rights can be sorted out if someone ever wants to use a byproduct commercially. It’s totally unclear what percentage of profit from the image I’ve created should be given to the original photographer.

]]> By: Hubbers http://www.erik-rasmussen.com/blog/2008/05/14/desk-traffic/#comment-2487 Hubbers Wed, 14 May 2008 09:46:35 +0000 http://www.erik-rasmussen.com/blog/?p=614#comment-2487 Great pic - you could sell that one. What is the deal with Creative Commons? if they are using that license you can just take their pics? Great pic - you could sell that one.

What is the deal with Creative Commons? if they are using that license you can just take their pics?

]]>