By: pietercolpaert

pietercolpaert — Sat, 17 Apr 2010 13:27:30 +0000

«I think one of the problems is that we don’t have laws that allow people to “protect” what they want to which is not to have distortions of their views presented as their views and so the choose ND type licenses in an effort to do that as it is the only tool that comes close to what they want.»

With CC BY-SA I don’t think that is a real problem. When they make a derivative work and twist your words in another context they will still have to attribute you and link to the original work.

As well will they have to license this remix CC BY-SA. Which means you are free to edit their remix and twist their words.

In the end it would have been a smarter move not to twist your words in the first place, because you will have had a lot of publicity for your original work.

By: drew Roberts

drew Roberts — Sat, 17 Apr 2010 12:35:55 +0000

I think one of the problems is that we don’t have laws that allow people to “protect” what they want to which is not to have distortions of their views presented as their views and so the choose ND type licenses in an effort to do that as it is the only tool that comes close to what they want.

I don’t like ND for this myself either. It may not even work for the purpose due to the possibility of misquote in a fair use situation. What else can you use?

For written works, you could try BY-SA with a prior disallowing of using your name in connection with any derivatives (possibly unless approved by you) but this would be tougher to do in a video where you are speaking on screen. The license would have to make you be pulled out of those scenes and someone else put in. Otherwise, they would be putting their words into your mouth so to speak.

Could it be that we don’t have good tools for this because the laws have been made with the promotion and protection of large commercial interests in mind?

Comments on: Patently Absurd

By: pietercolpaert

By: drew Roberts