About this weblog
Here we'll explore the nexus of legal rulings, Capitol Hill
policy-making, technical standards development, and technological
innovation that creates -- and will recreate -- the networked world as we
know it. Among the topics we'll touch on: intellectual property
conflicts, technical architecture and innovation, the evolution of
copyright, private vs. public interests in Net policy-making, lobbying
and the law, and more.
Disclaimer: the opinions expressed in this weblog are those of the authors and not of their respective institutions.
What Does "Copyfight" Mean?
Copyfight, the Solo Years: April 2002-March 2004
1. Neo on April 7, 2005 10:54 AM writes...
I find it curious that Copyfight itself doesn't have a creative commons license. Instead there's the all-too-traditional "all rights reserved" at the bottom of most pages.
Permalink to Comment2. Neo on April 7, 2005 11:06 AM writes...
Actually, on a second look it's even stranger than that. The main blog pages (but not the comments pages) have "all rights reserved" at the bottom. And every page *does* have a creative commons sticker tucked away on the left hand column where it's unlikely to be noticed, below most of the content but not right at the bottom of the page. These probably are in direct contradiction. What on Earth is going on?
Permalink to Comment3. Donna Wentworth on April 7, 2005 11:11 AM writes...
Putting everything under CC was part of my agreement with Corante when I started Copyfight -- these posts are all under CC. I'm concerned that there may be confusion because of the "all rights reserved" notice at the bottom, and the aggregator/blog-tracking issue. Perhaps the solution is embedding CC in every individual post. I'm in the process of clearing this up. (The "neighbors" are working this out publicly, which is why I pointed to them.)
Permalink to Comment