wiki-li...@phizz.demon.co.uk wrote: > Firstly, people are NOT meant to be uploading content to flickr that > they did not take themselves. They do, though.
> If someone blogs the photo from flickr > then the flickr system will tag it as the work of the account that IOW > it will be falsely attributed, and the downstream user will be in > violation of the CC license. > True. > Secondly, just because YOU think something is PD or licensed under > Creative Commons does not mean that it is in reality so. For example > many images on flickr have been lifted from the web and the account > uploading them falsely applies a CC license to everything uploaded. > > If that was true, it would mean that any worrying about licensing on Commons is void as well, because after all, "just because some Commons user thinks something is public domain doesn't mean it really is". Obviously, there *are* lots of cases where media files clearly are copyrighted, and cases where they are clearly in public domain. Those cases are the interesting ones, and the one we should focus on. Cheers, Jovan Cormac _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
