Quote:
Originally Posted by Tex2002ans
Don't want to get bogged down in the specifics, but CC0 is not the Public Domain... Copyright is very sticky, meaning it is automatically applied + impossible to get rid of under the current laws. Even under CC0, depending on the jurisdiction, there may be a whole host of other "neighboring rights" still applied [...]
From all of my years of being interested in the topic, CC-BY is probably your best bet to something that is actually enforceable in court internationally, while still being as close to the Public Domain as currently possible.
|
From what I read at CC on the CC0 "Public Domain" license, there are two types of CC0 and therefore 2 different logos... one is a C with a slash line through it.... this is the "Public Domain mark" intended for works with "no known copyright" such as very old works, etc. Libraries or museums might use this mark when posting certain materials.
Then there is the CC0 logo that is a 0 (zero) with a slash through it. This means the person posting the work is the author and has released the work into the PD without reserving rights or requiring attribution. (Edit: This is the only CC0 I am using.)
I much prefer this to CC BY SA, personally.
As to putting the 0 (zero) logo on pictures that the author posted with the CC0 license...
Quote:
|
No. I would say it would be more accurate to include no information than false information.
|
Imo it is not false information to include the author's license info. ? (Edit: Maybe you were thinking of the "Public Domain mark" and no, I would not use works with that mark as I don't know if the person who assigned it knows if the copyright has expired or not... plus the pictures I need are current pictures taken by the creators of the work, so the CC0 0-slash license applies.)
Quote:
Attribution is always a great idea, and any reasonable person should try to give thanks/credit where credit is due. 
|
Totally agreed! And thanks for all of your valuable input.