On Thu, August 6, 2009 11:40, Emily L. Ferguson wrote: > At 8:36 AM -0700 8/6/09, lookaround360@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >>Andrea, >>Just what I was looking for! Thank you. I think the plain vanilla CC >>license you suggested is fine. I wonder what kind of feed-back CC >>licensees get from users? > > The product is free. Why wouldn't they love them? And they ignore > the license too. > >> I'd like to see how the images get used. > > everywhere you go - billboards, full page ads in magazines, web sites > all over the internet. This is certainly possible; I've never gone looking for cases of CC stock images being used for big projects, because it's a lot of work and I only have moderate curiosity, no actual need to find out. > Licenses like that make it much harder for me to earn a living. Tragic as it is, one does not in fact have any actual right to continue to earn a living in the same way and at the same level as one has been; not just automatically. (Turns out the same is true in software, my profession, as well.) -- David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b@xxxxxxxx; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
