We are very proud of the The Flickr Commons photos uploaded by galleries, libraries, archives, museums, and governmental institutions. These photos won’t be deleted as a result of any of our announ…
Great to see them explicitly address the questions they’ve been getting about archival value of photos as well as the commons and Creative Commons licensed photos on their service.
From border crossings to hacking conferences, that Bitcoin or political sticker may be worth leaving on a case at home.
I had a very short conversation at the IndieWeb Summit 2018 in Portland with Nate Angell about the stickers on his laptop. Who knew he was such a subject area expert that Motherboard/Vice was using his material?
Of course this also reminds me that if academics, journalists, and publications/outlets were using webmentions when they credited creative commons articles, photos, audio, or other content, then the originator would get a notification that it was being used. This could also tip the originator off that their licensed content is being properly used.
I have openly shared, published online, gave away the store on just about everything I have created since getting into ed-tech in the early 1990s (c.f. “old dude”). I did this before there was a Creative Commons, I embrace and advocate CC, yet I don’t find all that much interesting in debating the various license flavors.
While I understand the reasons for having so many two letter alphabet combos to string along after CC BY, frankly my dear, I think there are way too many of them. I’d rather be making stuff than dissecting licenses.
tl;dr: Is it really worth the effort to put a license on anything? Who’s going to steal it? And if they do, god bless them.
I could go with this…