A few days ago I blogged without comment a video by Larry Lessig on the Creative Commons. It’s a great video, but I won’t use it to license my photography. Why? Jim covers most of my reservations about the scheme. This might come as a surprise to some but one of the main reasons I “reserve all rights” on my Flickr stream and photoblog is because I would like some say in how my images are used. I would be horrified if a picture of my son was used in a derogatory way, or if a photo of a stranger on the street appeared in an inappropriate context.
If I was going to use one of their licenses then it would have to be the cc-GPL. I’ve released GPL licensed software for the past 10 years and at least then all materials used in any derivative works would have to be made available. Would that mean a magazine featuring a GPL licensed image would have to make PDF files of their magazine available? I hope so. I also do not want to give up my right to redistribute my image under a different license. As the original copyright holder of the work that is important to me. Anyway, my duck photo shows that many people think photos found online are there to be ripped off and used. I don’t think it matters what license you use.
This image would definitely not make it into the wedding album. Love it!
Paul Indigo took a great portrait here. I can only imagine how bossy that woman was if he compares her to Hyacinth Bucket. Paul is so right. The number of “That’s great”, or “Lovely image” comments on Flickr and photoblogs is overwhelming. They don’t add much to the photographer’s skills. Critique!