200664
One of the licenses ("to give the artist their right to redistribute their work any way they like") now get a certain license applied (CC BY-NC-SA), to "give the artist their right to redistribute their work any way they like"
This reasoning falls a bit short, since:
1. It's actually more of a restriction over how an author may control the distribution/monetization/anything else covered by the license chosen, when a platform assigns a license to entries mandating their non-BotB usage (I assume this is how it's supposed to be implied, at least)
2. "All rights reserved" still applies by copyright law, when anything else isn't specifically mentioned
I agree that the legal "waiver" (CC BY-ND) the author gives BotB for each entry, is necessary.
.. And perhaps, just like how it's done now, an additional license could provide some additional clarity for those who don't understand copyright law.
But, perhaps the author could at least then choose from a list of available licenses? Maybe the most common CC-variations for starters.
But that also makes me wonder, why not also "All Rights Reserved"? I don't see how this could cause any liability concerns for BotB, given the presence of the "waiver". Nor do I understand how the actions taken of other people elsewhere with BotB-entries is of BotB's concern.
This is something that's been on my mind for a while. It's far from a critical issue, but perhaps something to consider for the future that might benefit authors on BotB. What do you people think? Discuss!
This reasoning falls a bit short, since:
1. It's actually more of a restriction over how an author may control the distribution/monetization/anything else covered by the license chosen, when a platform assigns a license to entries mandating their non-BotB usage (I assume this is how it's supposed to be implied, at least)
2. "All rights reserved" still applies by copyright law, when anything else isn't specifically mentioned
I agree that the legal "waiver" (CC BY-ND) the author gives BotB for each entry, is necessary.
.. And perhaps, just like how it's done now, an additional license could provide some additional clarity for those who don't understand copyright law.
But, perhaps the author could at least then choose from a list of available licenses? Maybe the most common CC-variations for starters.
But that also makes me wonder, why not also "All Rights Reserved"? I don't see how this could cause any liability concerns for BotB, given the presence of the "waiver". Nor do I understand how the actions taken of other people elsewhere with BotB-entries is of BotB's concern.
This is something that's been on my mind for a while. It's far from a critical issue, but perhaps something to consider for the future that might benefit authors on BotB. What do you people think? Discuss!