CC Forum » General CC questions and answers [English]

Deadbeats and aggregators

(2 posts)
  • Started 10 months ago by richmx2
  • Latest reply from Matthias

  1. richmx2
    Member

    As a professional writer, I naturally expect to get paid something for my work. For my own website, The Mex Files (http://mexfiles.net), I added a CC License to allow educational and non-profit groups access to my material (and, I hope, sell some of my books, or get me a paying gig). My feeling is that a group that is using written material for their own profit should pay their workers -- the writers.

    I've run into a situation lately where another user here in Mexico is reposting my material (at least credited to me) on a site designed to drum up business for his real estate company. I have requested he not do that. He said he wasn't, but then again today (the day after telling me he had taken down my material) he again did the same thing.

    Short of getting an "amparo" (our version of a court order) against him, any steps I can take to stop this kind of thing.

    AND... what do others consider "non-commerical reuse" anyway?

    Posted 10 months ago #

  2. Matthias
    Member

    I would like to see the answer to this question as well. Many people interpret non-commercial reuse in different ways. I would like to see what this term specifically means under a Creative Commons license.

    For example, (while taking this situation into consideration) some people believe that it follows under the terms of non-commercial reuse if one duplicates and redistributes a copy of another author's material without charging for its view in any way to his or her own respective viewers, even if this site is profiting from the viewing material in some way, shape, or form. (Ex. Putting an ad of the site's e-commerce store next to the duplicated material that sells items related to the licensed material. In this case the copy and pasted material would attract viewers and then direct some of these viewers to buy the duplicator's products.) Other people may believe that non-commercial reuse means that any duplicated material cannot be established on any site that profits from it in any way, shape, or form. (This would even include the situation stated above.)

    Which one situation is correct according to the license? Or perhaps is it under the authority of the licensee to choose which specific situation is acceptable or not? Any response would be appreciated!

    Posted 10 months ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.