| *** MarkDude has quit IRC | 00:06 | |
| *** mralex has quit IRC | 00:40 | |
| *** jgay has quit IRC | 00:50 | |
| *** JED3 has quit IRC | 01:14 | |
| *** Bovinity has joined #cc | 01:16 | |
| *** ea4xgr has quit IRC | 02:31 | |
| *** Odemia has quit IRC | 02:35 | |
| *** Odemia has joined #cc | 02:56 | |
| *** JoiIto has joined #cc | 02:57 | |
| *** erlehmann has joined #cc | 03:05 | |
| erlehmann | hello there | 03:07 |
|---|---|---|
| *** JoiIto has quit IRC | 04:10 | |
| *** JoiIto has joined #cc | 04:55 | |
| *** JoiIto has left #cc | 04:55 | |
| *** JoiIto1 has joined #cc | 05:00 | |
| *** JoiIto1 has quit IRC | 05:05 | |
| *** Kaetemi has joined #cc | 05:39 | |
| *** Kaetemi has quit IRC | 05:58 | |
| *** odemia_ has joined #cc | 06:20 | |
| *** Odemia has quit IRC | 06:20 | |
| *** erlehmann is now known as erduschmann | 06:37 | |
| *** ea4xgr has joined #cc | 06:41 | |
| *** Bovinity has quit IRC | 06:51 | |
| *** nkinkade has quit IRC | 07:07 | |
| *** ea4xgr has quit IRC | 07:43 | |
| *** wormsxulla has quit IRC | 08:00 | |
| *** wormsxulla has joined #cc | 08:22 | |
| *** stas has quit IRC | 09:10 | |
| *** erduschmann has quit IRC | 09:35 | |
| *** d00b has quit IRC | 09:45 | |
| *** stas has joined #cc | 09:52 | |
| *** d00b has joined #cc | 11:00 | |
| *** stas has quit IRC | 11:38 | |
| *** stevecam has quit IRC | 12:21 | |
| *** JoiIto has joined #cc | 12:33 | |
| *** stevecam has joined #cc | 12:36 | |
| *** erlehmann has joined #cc | 13:08 | |
| *** tetrahidrocanabi has joined #cc | 13:08 | |
| *** tetrahidrocanabi has left #cc | 13:09 | |
| *** bassel has joined #cc | 13:17 | |
| *** JoiIto1 has joined #cc | 13:54 | |
| *** JoiIto has quit IRC | 13:58 | |
| *** haoyu has joined #cc | 13:58 | |
| *** nkinkade has joined #cc | 14:24 | |
| *** JoiIto1 has left #cc | 14:31 | |
| *** michi_ has joined #cc | 15:02 | |
| *** nathany has joined #cc | 15:11 | |
| d00b | hi nathany, any update for mentor on "openoffice plugin for ontology extraction" | 15:13 |
| *** ea4xgr has joined #cc | 15:19 | |
| *** stas has joined #cc | 15:20 | |
| *** Bovinity has joined #cc | 15:23 | |
| *** bassel has quit IRC | 15:25 | |
| *** Kaetemi has joined #cc | 15:28 | |
| *** Bovinity has quit IRC | 15:36 | |
| *** jgay has joined #cc | 15:43 | |
| *** jgay has quit IRC | 15:44 | |
| *** jgay has joined #cc | 15:45 | |
| *** nathany has quit IRC | 16:11 | |
| *** michi_ has quit IRC | 16:24 | |
| paroneayea | nkinkade: ping | 16:29 |
| nkinkade | paroneayea: Hi. | 16:29 |
| paroneayea | oh. I was just going to ask you if you knew where I would go to add new strings to pootle | 16:30 |
| paroneayea | but I found it :P | 16:30 |
| *** mralex has joined #cc | 16:36 | |
| *** luisv has joined #cc | 16:42 | |
| nkinkade | paroneayea: Did you find this bit of documentation too: http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Translating_with_Pootle/Administration | 16:50 |
| nkinkade | Are you asking regard to Polley's email? | 16:52 |
| *** mralex has quit IRC | 16:53 | |
| *** mralex has joined #cc | 16:53 | |
| *** robmyers has joined #cc | 16:55 | |
| paroneayea | nkinkade: yes and yes | 16:56 |
| paroneayea | he is right, there is no cc0 title string at the moment | 16:56 |
| paroneayea | (er, [s]he) | 16:57 |
| *** luisv has left #cc | 17:04 | |
| *** haoyu has quit IRC | 17:12 | |
| *** luisv has joined #cc | 17:27 | |
| *** michi_ has joined #cc | 17:42 | |
| *** tantek has joined #cc | 18:04 | |
| *** luisv_ has joined #cc | 18:06 | |
| *** luisv has quit IRC | 18:07 | |
| *** luisv_ is now known as luisv | 18:07 | |
| *** oshani has joined #cc | 18:11 | |
| *** stas has quit IRC | 18:22 | |
| *** stas has joined #cc | 18:23 | |
| *** nathany has joined #cc | 18:33 | |
| *** michi_ has quit IRC | 18:38 | |
| *** tantek has quit IRC | 18:48 | |
| greg-g | ok, I'm going to hate myself for asking this, but I feel like I have to... Does anyone know of a reasonable argument FOR the use of the NC clause? | 18:57 |
| luisv | it is the obvious one | 18:58 |
| luisv | helps artists commercialize | 18:58 |
| greg-g | how about for a nonprofit/academic institution? | 18:59 |
| paroneayea | my main argument "for" NC isn't an "anyone I know should use it" argument | 19:00 |
| mralex | schools are very particular about having their assets sold | 19:00 |
| * greg-g is looking at this and doesn't see a good argument to use: http://freedomdefined.org/Licenses/NC | 19:00 | |
| paroneayea | it's more a "helps shift the balance of copyright toward something more sharing oriented / permissive for those who can't really embrace FaiF ideas" | 19:00 |
| *** nathany has quit IRC | 19:00 | |
| *** nathany_ has joined #cc | 19:00 | |
| greg-g | paroneayea: hmmm | 19:00 |
| paroneayea | but that's not really a reason to use it | 19:00 |
| paroneayea | it's a reason for it to exist | 19:00 |
| greg-g | right | 19:00 |
| greg-g | mralex: sometimes. lets pretend this entity isn't too gungho about selling its content | 19:01 |
| paroneayea | do you have to give a good reason to use it then? | 19:01 |
| paroneayea | seems like a good opportunity to say, don't use this because these licenses are better | 19:02 |
| greg-g | "have to" is strong. I thought I would present pros and cons | 19:02 |
| paroneayea | "wikipedia compatibility" is the #1 con | 19:02 |
| paroneayea | that people grokk | 19:02 |
| paroneayea | er, wikipedia incompatibility | 19:02 |
| * greg-g nods | 19:03 | |
| robmyers | greg-g Well in the UK the BBC isn't meant to compete with commercial interests, so NC might look like a good way of doing that (it's not, but mumblemumblegrumble ;-) ) | 19:04 |
| greg-g | robmyers: good point | 19:04 |
| paroneayea | sometimes I can't believe how much work it takes me to remember something I said, did or programmed | 19:08 |
| paroneayea | and that's with my life copiously annotated in orgmode these days | 19:09 |
| *** luisv has quit IRC | 19:09 | |
| robmyers | that's what blogs are for. well, what my blog is for. it's an outboard memory ;-) | 19:09 |
| paroneayea | I only update my blog every couple of months it seems | 19:11 |
| paroneayea | although I update my microblog on identi.ca maybe a bit *too* often even | 19:11 |
| paroneayea | that's not the same thing though, I don't say "I wrote this function that generates the i18n string for this license blah blah" | 19:12 |
| robmyers | I sometimes google a question and find myself answering it some time ago... ;-) | 19:12 |
| paroneayea | heh | 19:12 |
| paroneayea | anyway, speaking of that... | 19:12 |
| paroneayea | nathany_: you around? | 19:12 |
| paroneayea | oh you're probably at lunch. | 19:13 |
| *** nathany_ has quit IRC | 19:13 | |
| paroneayea | question answered! | 19:13 |
| paroneayea | (question of "are you around" that is, not my real question) | 19:14 |
| *** luisv has joined #cc | 19:21 | |
| *** JoiIto has joined #cc | 19:39 | |
| *** nathany has joined #cc | 19:48 | |
| *** tantek has joined #cc | 19:54 | |
| *** oshani has quit IRC | 20:00 | |
| *** oshani has joined #cc | 20:05 | |
| paroneayea | nathany: ping | 20:07 |
| paroneayea | nathany: nm | 20:11 |
| *** nathany has quit IRC | 20:13 | |
| *** JED3 has joined #cc | 20:32 | |
| *** JoiIto has quit IRC | 20:33 | |
| *** wormsxulla has quit IRC | 20:42 | |
| *** ea4xgr has quit IRC | 20:47 | |
| *** bassel has joined #cc | 20:50 | |
| *** wormsxulla has joined #cc | 21:01 | |
| greg-g | luisv: really, I'm not seeing those prices. I'm seeing 6 bedroom/2.5 bath places for $100,000 | 21:03 |
| luisv | right, and lots of people aren't seeing those prices in detroit either; they're literally giving away shit there | 21:04 |
| luisv | the experiment I want to run is not 'live cheap, attract smart college students', it is 'live dirt cheap, attract dirty hippies' ;) | 21:05 |
| greg-g | well, yeah. But weighing the benefits of A) having a good university job in A2, B) the U-M attracting good people to steal and C) I feel better about planting a garden in A2 than detroit based on soil tests, I went with A2 :) | 21:05 |
| luisv | <shrug> | 21:06 |
| greg-g | dont' know if I have the gumption for that | 21:06 |
| luisv | oh, I probably don't either | 21:06 |
| luisv | but if I wanted to half-ass it I'd choose durham, with better weather and smarter students ;) | 21:06 |
| * luisv runs | 21:06 | |
| greg-g | haha | 21:07 |
| luisv | (I'm also regularly tempted by costa rica) | 21:07 |
| greg-g | yep | 21:07 |
| *** oshani has quit IRC | 21:13 | |
| * luisv wonders if he could get enough outside counsel work to settle in rural NC, farm, and homeschool a kid | 21:18 | |
| JED3 | luisv: where in NC? i grew up in rural NC | 21:19 |
| luisv | JED3: dunno, somewhere within (say) an hour's drive of durham, probably | 21:19 |
| luisv | to get at least some occasional slice of culture | 21:19 |
| luisv | <- duke alum, married to a duke alum, big brother of a duke frosh | 21:20 |
| JED3 | luisv: ohh okay, yeah i lived about 30-40 min away from Durham | 21:20 |
| JED3 | <-- alum of NCSU | 21:20 |
| luisv | I have lots of NCSU alum friends, through red hat | 21:20 |
| luisv | and NCSSM, through same | 21:20 |
| JED3 | ohh cool, yeah I have a few close friends who I graduated with that joined the ranks there as well | 21:21 |
| luisv | it is a good place to work | 21:21 |
| JED3 | luisv: Durham has really changed, for the much better that is | 21:21 |
| luisv | yeah, I really like durham, and raleigh is getting to be a pretty nice place to be too | 21:22 |
| JED3 | they're both trying to catch up with Chapel hill | 21:22 |
| luisv | haha | 21:22 |
| luisv | dunno, I never really grokked chapel hill | 21:22 |
| luisv | seemed like it would be fun to go to college in but not necessarily live as an adult in? | 21:23 |
| JED3 | luisv: idk, i tend to think the opposite, at least imagining living in the rural edges of chapel hill, maybe in Hillsborough or Pittsboro | 21:24 |
| luisv | yeah, obviously lots of people love it | 21:24 |
| JED3 | I would have despised going to college there though heh | 21:25 |
| luisv | and I have never lived there, though I have visited very good friends who lived in hillsborough (and ended up moving back to durham ;) | 21:25 |
| luisv | well, I mean, Carolina sucks | 21:25 |
| luisv | it seems we can agree on that | 21:25 |
| luisv | :) | 21:25 |
| JED3 | agreed! | 21:25 |
| luisv | but it did have better nightclubs than durham ;) | 21:25 |
| JED3 | and great music venues | 21:26 |
| luisv | yup | 21:28 |
| *** oshani has joined #cc | 21:35 | |
| *** kjbbb has quit IRC | 21:46 | |
| nkinkade | luisv: If you start up that farm let me know, though Costa Rica would be vastly higher on my list than the plains of North Carolina. | 21:50 |
| luisv | I'll add you to the list | 21:51 |
| *** ward_ has joined #cc | 21:54 | |
| ward_ | what does "attribution" mean? http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/deed.en | 21:55 |
| ward_ | ( Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.0 Generic ) | 21:55 |
| ward_ | this is the license of a flickr foto i want to use to draw a portrait in photoshop | 21:56 |
| ward_ | also: 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). | 21:56 |
| ward_ | i deidnt really find anything specified by the author :s | 21:56 |
| mralex | then use the author's name | 21:57 |
| ward_ | yeah of course i was going to link back to the original pic | 21:57 |
| ward_ | but i'm wondering if this is allowed or not.... (drawing portrait that has the same composition) | 21:57 |
| robmyers | a link back is good as well | 21:58 |
| ward_ | i only have A FLICKR USERNAME ANYWAY SO | 21:58 |
| ward_ | sorry capslock.. | 21:58 |
| robmyers | it's a share-alike licence, so you can draw it or collage it as long as you place your new work under the same license ("share and share alike") | 21:58 |
| ward_ | yeah thats no prob :) | 21:59 |
| ward_ | i just want to use the drawing as an example of what i can do | 21:59 |
| ward_ | portfolio stuff | 21:59 |
| tantek | default for attribution is link to the page of the original work with licensing information | 21:59 |
| * tantek just read through the CC licensing docs recently regarding this very issue. | 21:59 | |
| tantek | so e.g. when re-using a Flickr photo, link it to the Flickr page for that photo. | 22:00 |
| tantek | and providing that link is sufficient to satisfy default attribution | 22:00 |
| ward_ | yeah :) | 22:00 |
| ward_ | the confusing part was the definition of attribution | 22:00 |
| tantek | also satisfies Flickr's TOS regarding embedding <img> tags with src= something on their server | 22:00 |
| tantek | yeah - was definitely a challenge to decode that | 22:01 |
| tantek | btw - anybody here interested in reviewing some brainstorming for microformats for licensing specific items/embeds on pages? | 22:01 |
| tantek | fyi: http://microformats.org/wiki/item-license | 22:02 |
| ward_ | i didn't know about this place btw :) google told me about it | 22:04 |
| ward_ | (i use freenode frequently for other chqns) | 22:04 |
| ward_ | any good links for CC licensed photographs you guys know of? (if thats not too offtopic) | 22:04 |
| luisv | flickr is really the place to go | 22:05 |
| luisv | though google image search now has cc licensed content as well | 22:06 |
| ward_ | yeah i noticed that also a while ago | 22:06 |
| luisv | tantek: I think CC is firmly in bed with the rdfa crowd ;) | 22:06 |
| luisv | tantek: though I'm curious myself | 22:06 |
| * luisv sees linksvayer's name on the proposal, does a double-take | 22:07 | |
| nkinkade | ward_: Wikimedia Commons is another great place to go for CC-licensed images. | 22:10 |
| ward_ | nkinkade: thanx i'll bookmark it for the future :) | 22:11 |
| nkinkade | Also, it's questionable whether simply linking to a work fulfills the attribution requirement. | 22:11 |
| nkinkade | I'm sure it's debatable, as is everything regarding CC, but in my view linking may not be enough to the letter of the license. | 22:12 |
| luisv | license says name/title of work, no? | 22:12 |
| nkinkade | I wrote up an FAQ on giving good/proper attribution: http://wiki.creativecommons.org/FFAQ#How_do_I_properly_attribute_a_Creative_Commons_licensed_work.3F | 22:12 |
| ward_ | nkinkade: aaaaaaaaaah, attribution is just "giving credit"? | 22:13 |
| nkinkade | luisv: Right, and also the author's name, or screen name, or pseudonym, etc. | 22:13 |
| ward_ | it must be my bad english then lol | 22:13 |
| nkinkade | ward_: Exactly. | 22:13 |
| ward_ | nkinkade: i thought it was like "add something to the original work" | 22:14 |
| nkinkade | I don't think the licenses state that you *must* link anywhere, but it's nice form if you can. | 22:14 |
| ward_ | nkinkade: your page is much more clear though :) thanx for writing it down | 22:14 |
| ward_ | yeah of course, i'm vey gratefull to peopel ho use cc licenses | 22:15 |
| nkinkade | ward_: It's not my page, it's part of CC's FAQ. It just so happens that I was the one who wrote that particular FAQ. :-) | 22:15 |
| ward_ | especially if their work is REALLY professional | 22:15 |
| ward_ | nkinkade: lol whatever, thanx for writing it then :p | 22:15 |
| ward_ | if i came across it i would nto even have came to ask here :) | 22:16 |
| nkinkade | ward_: Are you not in the habit of reading FAQs when you have questions? ;-) | 22:18 |
| ward_ | nkinkade: i figured the page i linked was the only thing :) | 22:18 |
| nkinkade | [Via] => 1.1 proxy.google.com:80 (squid) | 22:19 |
| nkinkade | Interesting that Google seems to be using Squid. | 22:19 |
| ward_ | why? | 22:21 |
| ward_ | i read sometime they use a lot of python code | 22:22 |
| nkinkade | I don't know. I just think of Squid as old, somewhat inefficient, and a beast to configure. | 22:22 |
| nkinkade | That's just how I think of it, though it may be wrong. | 22:23 |
| ward_ | ah ok, no experience with it, i dunno | 22:23 |
| *** bassel has quit IRC | 22:25 | |
| ward_ | thanx for the clarification guys | 22:29 |
| *** jgay has quit IRC | 22:29 | |
| ward_ | gotta go, if i remember i'll come back to pass a link to the result when its finished :) | 22:29 |
| *** ward_ has quit IRC | 22:29 | |
| *** oshani has quit IRC | 22:32 | |
| *** bassel has joined #cc | 22:33 | |
| tantek | ward_ check out http://compfight.com/ for quick/easy searching of CC licensed Flickr photos | 22:34 |
| tantek | nkinkade - I based my comments re: attribution above on reading the license itself (cc-by-3.0) rather than the FAQ | 22:36 |
| nkinkade | tantek: The FAQ is based on the licenses themselves. | 22:36 |
| tantek | and had the good fortune of doing so in the company of mlinksvayer who helped walk me through it. | 22:36 |
| tantek | thus the conclusion that the the default preferred method is linking to a page with licensing information on it for the work in question | 22:36 |
| nkinkade | tantek: Where in the license is it indicated that simply linking somewhere with no visual text is suitable attribution? | 22:37 |
| nkinkade | Linking is always nice to do, but I don't think it's necessary. | 22:37 |
| tantek | like many things, it doesn't specifically list all the things you can avoid having to do - it's not reasonable to expect a listing of all such things | 22:37 |
| tantek | it's merely, *if* you link, what you *should* link to | 22:38 |
| nkinkade | tantek: Like I say, the FAQ entry is based on what the license says, not what one can infer from it. | 22:38 |
| tantek | if no specific attribution request/requirement is made | 22:38 |
| tantek | so is my response/answer above | 22:38 |
| nkinkade | Where in the license does it say anything about needing to link somewhere? | 22:38 |
| nkinkade | I don't mean providing a URL, but linking. | 22:39 |
| nkinkade | (two different things) | 22:39 |
| tantek | I didn't say *need* | 22:39 |
| tantek | you're inserting that straw requirement | 22:39 |
| tantek | here is the citation | 22:40 |
| tantek | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode | 22:40 |
| tantek | 4. b (iii) | 22:40 |
| tantek | "(iii) to the extent reasonably practicable, the URI, 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" | 22:40 |
| nkinkade | Right: "unless such URI does not refer to the copyright notice or licensing information for the Work" | 22:41 |
| tantek | so basically, it's saying, the link *should* be to a something that *does* refer to the copyright notice or licensing information for the work | 22:41 |
| tantek | silly double-negatives | 22:41 |
| nkinkade | It doesn't say anything about a link, but providing a URI. | 22:41 |
| luisv | I think you guys are violently agreeing ;) | 22:41 |
| tantek | nkinkade - yes a link is one way of providing a URI :) | 22:41 |
| tantek | you may of course provide the URI in other ways | 22:42 |
| nkinkade | My only objection was to tantek's statement above that said that "providing that link is sufficient to satisfy default attribution" | 22:42 |
| nkinkade | I wasn't making a legal argument by challenging that statement, only saying that I don't really agree. | 22:43 |
| nkinkade | At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter. | 22:43 |
| nkinkade | Attribution is rarely ever carried out as the license specifies, but just about nobody cares, which is the way it should be. | 22:43 |
| tantek | using the specific example of Flickr | 22:44 |
| tantek | a link to a photo page on Flickr contains the copyright notice + licensing information | 22:44 |
| tantek | it also contains (in the URI) the pseudonym of the content author | 22:45 |
| tantek | that leaves the title of the work (ii), which can arguably be retrieved from the link itself | 22:46 |
| *** oshani has joined #cc | 22:46 | |
| nkinkade | tantek: that may be true, but it doesn't give any apparent notification where the work itself is actually being resused. | 22:46 |
| tantek | ergo - default attribution satisfied per 4. b of http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode | 22:46 |
| nkinkade | *reused | 22:46 |
| nkinkade | And that an image is a hyperlink somewhere else is rarely apparently, so the author goes unattributed unless the user actually clicks the image. | 22:47 |
| tantek | anyway - that was the mutual conclusion mlinksvayer and I came to when re-reading this recently - and that helped drive some design aspects of the item-license proposal http://microformats.org/wiki/item-license | 22:47 |
| nkinkade | *apparent (sorry for the spelling errors) | 22:47 |
| nkinkade | Well, then in that case, I mostly disagree with Mike. | 22:48 |
| tantek | I think on the web, as long as the info is easily accessible (e.g. once click of a link), the expectations are satisfied (of providing author name/pseudonym etc.) | 22:48 |
| nkinkade | What Mike thinks is just an informed opinion ... as is what I think. But like I say, what any of us opine about it doesn't mean anything. | 22:48 |
| tantek | right | 22:48 |
| tantek | we're all just sharing varying degrees of informed opinion :) | 22:49 |
| nkinkade | We could go back and forth here for a long time. Just link if you feel that's enough. | 22:49 |
| tantek | I'm perfectly fine to submit that mine may be less informed than yours :) | 22:49 |
| tantek | just offering what I see as another reasonable point of view | 22:49 |
| nkinkade | tantek: I don't think "proper" attribution really matters to most people who honestly just want to see their work be useful or informative to someone else. | 22:50 |
| nkinkade | So all these interpretations are just academic. | 22:51 |
| JED3 | tantek: in the case of Flickr, when there is so much other metadata available, why would you reduce to only providing a link for attribution? | 22:51 |
| nkinkade | I'll leave it to horders and the lawyers to sue one another. :-) | 22:51 |
| tantek | and frankly what I've seen in practice is that people just want *some* form of attribution at least, and on the Web, links seem to carry quite a bit of currency there (thanks Google) | 22:51 |
| tantek | JED3 because by following the link you can go get all the rest of the metadata | 22:51 |
| tantek | that's sort of a fundamental web architecture thing right? no need to duplicate everything everywhere when you can simply hyperlink to it. | 22:52 |
| tantek | anyway - yes - from a format perspective, I've certainly seen people requesting that their name be listed, or their name+company etc. including a link | 22:54 |
| tantek | and all that drove the design of the "attribution" property for item-license: http://microformats.org/wiki/item-license#attribution_details | 22:54 |
| JED3 | tantek: yes, but for flickr, cc:attributionName is present | 22:55 |
| tantek | to provide those options for authors/publishers to explicitly say - here's how I want to be attributed | 22:55 |
| tantek | JED3, and Flickr puts authors' pseudonym's into their photo URLs, thus the link contains the name. | 22:56 |
| JED3 | tantek: okay then why would you neglect cc:attributionURL? | 22:57 |
| JED3 | ehh i guess that could be derived from the photo uri as well in flickr's case | 22:57 |
| tantek | that's the photo itself isn't it? | 22:57 |
| tantek | yeah | 22:58 |
| JED3 | no, on flickr it would be the photostream for that user i believe | 22:58 |
| tantek | ah but that's where 4. b. (iii) needs careful reading (as Mike showed me) | 22:58 |
| tantek | "(iii) to the extent reasonably practicable, the URI, 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" | 22:58 |
| tantek | a user's photostream URL on Flickr does not refer to the copyright notice or licensing information for the Work | 22:59 |
| tantek | therefore the "unless" clause of 4. b. (iii) is triggered | 22:59 |
| tantek | therefore there is no requirement to provide that (the user photostream) URL in attribution | 22:59 |
| tantek | I know - it is weird | 22:59 |
| tantek | and I had no idea that's how it worked | 23:00 |
| tantek | but that's the clause Mike showed me, and for that reason | 23:00 |
| luisv | so you're saying you don't have to provide the user's URI | 23:04 |
| tantek | correct | 23:04 |
| luisv | you're not saying you don't have to provide the URI for the work, right? | 23:04 |
| luisv | OK | 23:04 |
| luisv | just checking | 23:05 |
| tantek | I'm saying that the license text says that, as I was informed by Mike | 23:05 |
| luisv | right | 23:05 |
| tantek | luisv: re rdfa - I think the syntax question can be orthogonal. | 23:05 |
| tantek | the point of item-license is to pick a smaller/simplified vocabulary that works for the 80-90% of real world publishing cases with licensing (and optional attribution) info | 23:06 |
| tantek | you could use rdfa or class names to publish item-license | 23:06 |
| luisv | <nod> | 23:06 |
| tantek | microformats is mostly about vocabulary, with simply a default suggested syntax that works well with the way web designers author HTML | 23:07 |
| tantek | there's been a lot of folks from many communities to help make the microformats vocabularies reusable in a number of syntaxes, whether class names, rdfa, or the new microdata proposal spun out of HTML5 | 23:08 |
| tantek | I think it's good that people are trying out different syntaxes | 23:08 |
| luisv | I've been meaning to follow up on the microdata things | 23:09 |
| tantek | the real value is on interop on simple vocabularies | 23:09 |
| JED3 | nkinkade: i need to add a redirect on support, any clear disadvantage to using a php header in the page's edit in civi vs. adding it creativecommons.conf? | 23:11 |
| nkinkade | JED3: Why a redirect? | 23:12 |
| JED3 | eh, i'll just add it to creativecommons.conf | 23:12 |
| JED3 | i need to redirect /join to /donate?utm_source=join | 23:12 |
| nkinkade | JED3: That's a better bet as it keeps everything in one place, mostly. | 23:12 |
| nkinkade | Yeah, definitely make that in the vhost config. | 23:13 |
| JED3 | okay, yeah | 23:13 |
| tantek | anyway - thanks for your time anyone, and I'll try to be around sporadically if anyone has any more input/feedback on http://microformats.org/wiki/item-license | 23:14 |
| tantek | also, feel free to /join #microformats as well and give feedback there if you'd prefer | 23:14 |
| tantek | thanks! | 23:14 |
| tantek | s/anyone/everyone | 23:14 |
| JED3 | nkinkade: https://support.creativecommons.org/join | 23:16 |
| JED3 | its gone! horray | 23:16 |
| nkinkade | I'm glad to see it gone. Things were confusing before. | 23:16 |
| JED3 | i agree | 23:17 |
| JED3 | this is a much simpler approach | 23:17 |
| nkinkade | Is it $75 on /donate? $50 on /join? $25 on /join? Why did I just pay $75 on /donate when I could have got the same thing for $25 of /join .... etc. | 23:17 |
| nkinkade | $75, period. | 23:18 |
| mralex | now people who paid $50 can complain about $75, and that's it ;) | 23:18 |
| JED3 | mralex: page looks awesome btw | 23:20 |
| nkinkade | haha | 23:20 |
| JED3 | https://support.creativecommons.org/donate | 23:20 |
| *** odemia_ is now known as Odemia | 23:25 | |
| *** luisv has quit IRC | 23:27 | |
| *** mralex has quit IRC | 23:34 | |
| tantek | yes - very nice looking page | 23:47 |
| *** JoiIto has joined #cc | 23:49 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.6 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!