Caveats: NONE
Bill Fitzgerald said: "So, under this clause, I *could* post to the
list that any re-use of my work outside the context of this list must
contain a link back to this page:
http://www.funnymonkey.com/copyright-information -- of my web site --
I'm not going to do this, but it is within my legal rights. "
Interesting though but it would not change any aspect. When you post to
the list, the list creates four derivative CC-licensed works
automatically: email, digest, RSS feed, and archive web page. Because
you are initiating these processes through mechanisms you know are
automated it would be incumbent on you to provide your attribution
information with each email you send to the list (thought there is no
directly applicable case law I know of). =20
Subsequently, it would be Peter's responsibility to republish it without
alteration. If he was going to your site and copying your posts there,
it would be incumbent on him to read and follow your attribution notice.
Conversely, if he had an automated process, he initiated, he would be
required program it to follow your attribution rules (within reason).
But because ISED-L is the original derivative work, it is incumbent on
the list to do this and because you must opt in each time (by sending a
separate email) it is almost certainly incumbent on you.
While you retain copyright to your posts you have agreed to a license
that really only allows you a few options:
--You can license your work to a commercial entity for profit.
--You can revoke the need for attribution.
The licenses is practically impossible to terminate or revoke.
_J
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED=20
Caveats: NONE
[ For info on ISED-L see http://www.gds.org/ISED-L ]
Submissions to ISED-L are released under a creative commons, attribution, non-commercial, share-alike license.
