Jonas Smedegaard <[email protected]> writes: > Quoting John Sullivan (2014-09-05 04:26:36) >> Luke Faraone <[email protected]> writes: >> >>> On 4 September 2014 13:38, martin f krafft <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> also sprach Aigars Mahinovs <[email protected]> [2014-09-04 12:33 -0700]: >>>>> On a side note: I am note aware of any legal or privacy problems >>>>> occuring from uploading public CC/GPL-licensed photos to either >>>>> Google Plus or Flickr (paid version in both cases) >>>> >>>> Do their terms of service not include any form of implicit copyright >>>> transferral, e.g. what Facebook does? IANAL, but if you upload a >>>> picture to Facebook, you are giving it to them for whatever their >>>> use may be. If that use is in violation of the licence on the data, >>>> then I'd say *you* as the uploader are the one breaching the >>>> licence. >>> >>> http://blog.flickr.net/en/2011/05/13/at-flickr-your-photos-are-always-yours/ >>> >>> The terms do not seem to have materially changed in the interim. >>> >>> This appears to be similar to the license given to Facebook at >>> <https://www.facebook.com/terms.php>: >>> >> >> Those licenses seem incompatible with CC-BY-SA and such (when it comes >> to photos by not yourself), since they require giving the site a >> license which permits some proprietary redistribution. > > If you mean "those are not strong copyleft licenses" then I agree - and > am not surprised. > > If you mean "those licenses are not suitable for our redistribution" > then (I personally dislike it but) believe that's not a problem for > Debian if the copyright holder (i.e. the photographer, I assume) is fine > with it.
I was just highlighting that it doesn't look like you can upload someone else's CC-BY-SA photos to such services. Agree that it's not relevant for the case of the photographer (copyright holder) uploading the photos. -john _______________________________________________ Debconf-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-discuss
