[ASM scene] Assembly graphics compo question

[Albert Sandberg]

Maybe not relevant to the discussion as I have not read the license
myself, but how would you feel if you were the author of the photo and
some guy/gal at asm cashes in on your work? I don't think it's too
late to take a step back and acknowledge the fact that we made a
mistake.

Albert "thec" Sandberg


On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 11:56 AM, Jaakko Setälä <jaakko at setala.fi> wrote:
> Martti Roitto wrote:
>> Jaakko Setälä wrote:
>>> Reading the license a couple of times revealed that the limitation you
>>> mentioned does NOT apply on derivative work (just the photo as itself).
>>
>> The widely accepted definition of derivative work includes translation,
>> reproduction, abridgment, condensation, and adaptation in general, among
>> other things that don't apply here.
>>
>> I can't see how this work adapts anything or makes anything new out of
>> the previously published photo. Colorization, adding a text and a few
>> brush strokes is not even nearly enough original content to fit the
>> definition.
>
> Could be, but I still dont think the license itself counts as a reason
> for disqualification. (Morally I do think that the entry is not fit as
> an 'original work of art' and should be disqualified)
> I have to leave the final conclusions to compocrew and will be satisfied
> to any decision made by them.
>
>
> --
> Jaakko 'JJaska' Setälä
> Assembly Organizing / Systems Crew Function Head
> _______________________________________________
> Oldskool-list mailing list
> Oldskool-list at assembly.org
> http://justiina.assembly.org/mailman/listinfo/oldskool-list
>