I knew this would be an interesting discussion :-)
How much due diligence is a -reuse supposed to do? Can they rely on the uploaded/ licensor to have done this as a part of the process of uploading and applying the licence?
I recall the work that Suzanne et al did in this area as it was a particular concern for the medical related disciplines. The guidance offered duly recommended that these issues ought to be considered and raised the red flag about images with 'models' in them.
This is difficult/ interesting for us and we 'understand' CC licences/ copyright!!
Alex
-----Original Message-----
From: Open Educational Resources [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Pat (Pgogy)
Sent: 02 March 2015 16:17
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: CC images of Children.
On 2015-03-02 11:09, Pete Forsyth wrote:
> On Mar 2, 2015 8:05 AM, "Pat (Pgogy)" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > Moral rights tends to refer to the copyright holder.
>
> In what jurisdiction? That seems very problematic.
>
> Pete
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/contents
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_rights
Quite a few, if not most
I am not arguing you don't have a right to privacy (/ not to be
photographed) - good discussion here -
http://www.pcblawfirm.com/articles/legal-issues-photographing-people/
--
Pgogy Webstuff
pgogywebstuff.com
|