|Date:||November 22nd, 2009 11:52 am (UTC)|| |
|Date:||November 22nd, 2009 04:01 pm (UTC)|| |
Many terms of service also, however, have the catch-all "we may change the terms of service at any time without notice" [or variants of the same].
As I ponder this, I guess it comes down to if something like this happens, you take the content down...as a licensee, though, I'd like to know that I was protected from liability beyond taking the content down if I could show that I had acted in good faith when originally exercising the terms of the license.
I don't see anything in the CC license that protects licensees--could be a reason to avoid using commons except on sites where you exercise complete control over the whole page [which leaves out sites like LiveJournal, where the account status of the reader drives whether ads appear on certain pages that might display my content, or FaceBook, which will always have ads somewhere on the page.
Is there a search engine exception? Is the excerpt of content displayed in Google search results guaranteed to always meet the "fair use" test, for example?
|Date:||November 22nd, 2009 04:35 pm (UTC)|| |
Well, lj and facebook ads don't benefit *me*, so I think that would be OK. The idea is that the author can't use it for their own financial gain, right? There's indirect gain, like ads on LJ instead of paying for an account, but AFAIK that's allowed.
So AFAICT there's no problem with re-using content on sites that *have* ads, the problem is if I put content on a site I fully own, then put something like Google Ads on every page (or an affiliate link to Amazon.com, or a donation button).....that's the problem.
Then again, I'm not a lawyer :)
|Date:||November 22nd, 2009 04:56 pm (UTC)|| |
Hmmmm.....I guess that it comes down to what constitutes commercial use...and I really don't know.
I have extensive thoughts on this issue but will only share them if plied with turkey and pie.