A few days back, I posted about the difficulty of distinguishing commercial from noncommercial usage with respect to the Creative Commons license. There's an ongoing legal case that concerns another ...

One of the things you learn pretty quickly in the open source community is that "non-commercial use" is not a well-defined term. This is why the Open Source Definition doesn't allow for clauses to ...

Yahoo's recent move to sell prints of photos users have put on Flickr has sparked a backlash from many photographers who object to the company's policy of taking all the profits from sales of images ...

Wired.com today announced it would, from today forward, be releasing all of its staff-produced photos under a Creative Commons license. That means lots of photos of tech-and-geek-culture luminaries — ...

In 2019, thousands of artworks from 1923 entered the public domain. Speakers from Creative Commons, the Internet Archive, and other places share why this matters. In response to photographers' ...

Any work that is not a students', including text, music or images, if not cited is by definition plagiarized. In the worlds of academia, press, or other creative industries that use source information ...

No one is forcing anyone to put their work into the public commons. But, once you do, you need to accept that you no longer can wholly control how it is used. Gordon Haff is Red Hat's cloud evangelist ...