There is an issue, which the courts have yet to address, when a ‘liberal’ CC licence is originally issued, say on flickr, and changed later, say, to all rights reserved. Wikipedia, for example, tends to pick up only the original licence. My opinion is that publishers need to clear all usage and the duty is theirs and not the copyright owner. And that damages should be payable in all cases of a breach of copyright.

I have read that section 107 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 can be used against miscreants as it is a criminal offence to commercially exploit someone elses copyright material and that this is an effective means to target people using your material without your permission. If you find someone doing this, send them an invoice!

BTW whilst we are located in Spain, many of the offenders are located in the UK and covered by UK law.

I just watched this: http://boingboing.net/2011/12/18/london-cops-apologise-to-young.html

I am amazed at how calm and collected you sounded. Amazing – there is no way I could have been so level headed. I just wanted to say well done – I think what you did was great.

Very well done! Your actions in the face of provocation have been greatly admired by members of Pro Imaging. Keep up the good work.

Cheers

RIchard Kenward

Interesting questions. I actually initially started to write a bit on embedded files that remain hosted where you post them but quickly realised that a. I had no clue and b. it was getting unnecessarily complex for what was intended to be so I omitted it completely. I don’t think something placed into a page, a la youtube, would be infringement. But depending on the circumstances this may vary, you’d really need to talk to an actual lawyer on this!

As for new-media platforms, I agree they’re also quite confusing. I never usually follow them up when I see pictures appear, but I would say the same embedding point above probably applies in ones where it’s not transferred, but from my understanding the downloading and re-distribution to another server would probably be infringement. However, copyright law can be complex and these are large companies who I would hope have taken in depth legal advice on the issue before doing it, so again you really would need to talk to someone more in the know.

You would need a lawyer for a proper opinion in a specific case, but if you’re interested generally and on twitter, i’m sure Emily Goodhand would be able to enlighten you! https://twitter.com/copyrightgirl And I don’t disagree that it seems to be getting continually worse, a lot of new media/web 3.0 or whatever you want to call them sites just take other people’s content without due regard for copyright law sometimes, unfortunately…