Davos is snowy

General discussion about Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects
User avatar
Dysklyver
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2018 2:10 pm

Re: Davos is snowy

Post by Dysklyver » Thu Jun 28, 2018 8:33 am

Technically it is a valid licence, the latest developments in EU law could potentially interfere with it, but for the most part it is legally valid and proven by precedent. The key thing is that it is just a licence, effectively a unilateral contract, the actual copyright is still always held by the contributor.
Editor of the The Wiki Cabal. Find me on the Wikipediocracy Discord.

User avatar
EarlStatler
Posts: 396
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2017 1:19 pm

Re: Davos is snowy

Post by EarlStatler » Fri Jun 29, 2018 9:38 am

Dysklyver wrote:
Thu Jun 28, 2018 8:33 am
Technically it is a valid licence, the latest developments in EU law could potentially interfere with it, but for the most part it is legally valid and proven by precedent. The key thing is that it is just a licence, effectively a unilateral contract, the actual copyright is still always held by the contributor.
Exact. It is a permission, given by the owner of the copyright. If I write, he guy's take this picture and do whatever you want with it, it is the same. Or, you all may use this picture, as long it is not commercial.
But my copyright remains! And only I, the holder of the copyright can give that permission without any guaranty. Because I am using a nick, and nobody is sure where that picture came from. (From my camera.)
But look what this guy is doing! He is adding all kind of licence to MY work, because this is not the only picture where he did this, and he was saying that is the way we do this on Commons.

But of course such a licence has not any value, because it is only value if the copyright holder has given his permision, not a wikipediaen. They think they can "liberate" knowledge in this way, but that is nonsens. Because indeed the copyright always remain, and first you have to be sure the one who has given the permission is the copyright holder. And that is the reason I call it a bullshit licence, because I can also write I, Graaf Statler, the (Dutch) copyright holder of this work give you all permision to reuse my work, that is exacte the same.



Image
(For Aggie, tulips in The Netherlands, April 2018, Public Domain.)
If you're in a dogfight, become a cat!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests