[Imc-uk-process] copyleft/creative commons licenses

[ana]

Hi all...

I think we could follow this discussion on process list? not sure it is 
for features yet... I would like to follow on this proposal/s (read below)

Chris wrote:

>[...]
>
>Also there is Ana's proposal from last year to add a
>select list for the terms:
>
>  http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-process/2004-December/1201-nl.html
>
>and my follow up (which hasn't been followed up yet...):
>
>  http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-process/2004-December/1202-m3.html
>  
>
I have since changed my mind a little but following on from this and 
what i see in dada sites, i would like to propose...

a. we make the content of the newly posted [1]posts all creative commons 
(default [2] license)
b. add the possibility of registration of posters so that  they can edit 
their own articles.

I have not read the latest developments of the imc uk copy left wiki 
page, and it is a bit dull for the normal person, but what i have read, 
i can not really see objections to have the content "officially" copy 
left... On a supportive note for this I think it is true that whenever 
publishers contact us asking for the use of content, especially 
pictures, we tell them to contact the author directly  "if there is an 
email address or other contact details on the article" or else to 
consider it free to use for non-profit purposes. But there is not (or is 
there??) a page that "officially" says this.

So a solution would be to add to the newly created posts a sign that 
says it is published under creative commons. I am not sure how to 
formulate this as a formal proposal but basically, when you publish on a 
dada site, you get a question asking you whether you want your email 
address to be validated - this is to ensure readers that if they want to 
ask questions to the author of the article, they can because the system 
has confirmed that the email address published is a valid one. You do 
not need to validate or even give an email address if you do not want 
to, so anonymity is still optional and guaranteed if you chose to be 
anonymous.

A second question is under what creative commons license you want your 
article to be published. This is in my opinion a bit too technical if 
you are not familiar with cc licenses. So a solution could be to offer 
just the default cc license and add the more specific ones if we get 
proposals or petitions to add them [2].

Then this might be too complicated to apply to "all" the content of the 
uk site (remember people have been posting articles continuously since 
2000) So,, solution for this would be to apply as of "from today" [1] 
(today being the day we finally implement this, not today 4th of feburary).

well... if we believe that no answer equates to agreement or 'can;t be 
bothered to object' then we are on the correct track to implement 
something of this?

-----

[1] Newly posts: give the chance to publishers (yes another field in the 
publish page) to tick what license they want to apply, indicating that 
by default we consider all published material... (what do we consider it 
btw?) and, according to their response, indicating this on the published 
article. But we can not do that to old posts because the posters have 
not been given the chance to choose the license? and indeed there have 
been examples where some content was /is copyright material but they 
either are not bothering too much (corporate newspapers) or they have 
realised but they think we are so cool they are happy for their material 
to be there.

[2] there are many different creative common licenses. There is a 
default one, which is I believe quite close to copyleft. It has a legal 
text on which all the other licenses are based, with additions or 
extractions. Please correct me if i am wrong...
moreover, i am not sure if these licenses have been "assimilated" to UK 
law. they have been, to Spanish law, quite recently, i read on some lists.

-----
ana