Not sure if I've ever posted on this but I think going Open Access with Creative Commons is AWESOME!
And yeah, obviously you need to protect the agreement. Go at it.
Information About the AboveTopSecret.com Creative Commons Content Deed., page 1
privacy
Topic started on 16-1-2006 @ 09:49 AM by SkepticOverlord
Some time ago, we included the integration of the Creative Commons license/deed information in a link at the bottom right of each post and content item on our website. I want to remind member and guests about this content deed and our intent.
This is a clear nod to the fact that we have such vital and interesting material that the desire of some people to use it elsewhere is undeniable and inevitable. Since we have so much content (nearly 2 million unique pages) and so many guests, there is no possible way we can police where and how our material is used to prevent copy-and-paste of entire posts.
Combine this with an expanded way in which our content will be used (TV show), and the need for a more clear way for members to know their contributions are legally covered in a widely accepted way. Especially for the possibility of new members who have some cache or established credibility in our topic areas. If they consider joining ATS because of what they see on the show, they'll need reassurance that their contributions are properly covered and there is an effort to protect it.
The Creative Commons ideal tackles these issues in a way that protects the rights of both the author and publisher, while being nicely compatible with the core Internet culture of collaboration and the ethics of share and share alike. We're now saying that our material can be shared, in a strictly not-for-profit way, if the following is complied with:
1) The member's name is credited as author
2) The member and ATS are credited as co-owners
3) The thread title is indicated
4) A link is included to the first page of the thread
5) The content is not used for a derivative work
6) The content is not used for commercial purposes
(I wanted a link to the first page because I believe the totality of the thread places the single post in context, and is far more important.)
The Creative Commons license is an increasingly legally tested approach with precedence, growing support, and the involvement of some stellar intellectual property legal minds. In addition, their advocacy efforts for a continued free and open Internet are not only vital to a site like ATS, but represents one of the few non-profit causes we could embrace without possible political bias.
In one smooth stroke, we suddenly are openly denying ignorance in a way that makes us impeccably good "Internet citizens".
From time to time, as we discover sites using ATS content, we will make an effort to ensure that they comply with the terms of our Creative Commons Deed. In the vast majority of situations we've encountered, compliance has been cheerfully given in the spirit of collaboration. In some situations, ATS content is used for commercial purposes, we'll be seeking removal in these cases. You did not create your brilliant post to see someone else (who you may not agree with) profit from your effort.
Update And Reminder About the AboveTopSecret.com Creative Commons Deed
Some time ago, we included the integration of the Creative Commons license/deed information in a link at the bottom right of each post and content item on our website. I want to remind member and guests about this content deed and our intent.
This is a clear nod to the fact that we have such vital and interesting material that the desire of some people to use it elsewhere is undeniable and inevitable. Since we have so much content (nearly 2 million unique pages) and so many guests, there is no possible way we can police where and how our material is used to prevent copy-and-paste of entire posts.
Combine this with an expanded way in which our content will be used (TV show), and the need for a more clear way for members to know their contributions are legally covered in a widely accepted way. Especially for the possibility of new members who have some cache or established credibility in our topic areas. If they consider joining ATS because of what they see on the show, they'll need reassurance that their contributions are properly covered and there is an effort to protect it.
The Creative Commons ideal tackles these issues in a way that protects the rights of both the author and publisher, while being nicely compatible with the core Internet culture of collaboration and the ethics of share and share alike. We're now saying that our material can be shared, in a strictly not-for-profit way, if the following is complied with:
1) The member's name is credited as author
2) The member and ATS are credited as co-owners
3) The thread title is indicated
4) A link is included to the first page of the thread
5) The content is not used for a derivative work
6) The content is not used for commercial purposes
(I wanted a link to the first page because I believe the totality of the thread places the single post in context, and is far more important.)
The Creative Commons license is an increasingly legally tested approach with precedence, growing support, and the involvement of some stellar intellectual property legal minds. In addition, their advocacy efforts for a continued free and open Internet are not only vital to a site like ATS, but represents one of the few non-profit causes we could embrace without possible political bias.
In one smooth stroke, we suddenly are openly denying ignorance in a way that makes us impeccably good "Internet citizens".
From time to time, as we discover sites using ATS content, we will make an effort to ensure that they comply with the terms of our Creative Commons Deed. In the vast majority of situations we've encountered, compliance has been cheerfully given in the spirit of collaboration. In some situations, ATS content is used for commercial purposes, we'll be seeking removal in these cases. You did not create your brilliant post to see someone else (who you may not agree with) profit from your effort.
reply posted on 16-1-2006 @ 08:50 PM by SkepticOverlord
Also, to confirm some concepts here...
When you post to ATS, according to our Terms & Conditions, you provide us "non-exclusive" rights to use your post as we see fit. This means we do not have any exclusive rights... we can't dictate how you use what you post here. However, once it is here, we will be active in protecting the integrity of your contribution. This is the intent of the CC deed, and our recent efforts to enforce it.
If your work suddenly has value to you (such as the possibility of publishing some of the short stories you've posted here), and it's presence here detracts from that value, let us know. We'd likely remove it, or restrict access to it so that you can move forward with gaining compensation from your writings.
The one stand-out that will be different form this is our Conspiracy Masters, where we are establishing a system of compensation based on the traffic their contributions generate.
When you post to ATS, according to our Terms & Conditions, you provide us "non-exclusive" rights to use your post as we see fit. This means we do not have any exclusive rights... we can't dictate how you use what you post here. However, once it is here, we will be active in protecting the integrity of your contribution. This is the intent of the CC deed, and our recent efforts to enforce it.
If your work suddenly has value to you (such as the possibility of publishing some of the short stories you've posted here), and it's presence here detracts from that value, let us know. We'd likely remove it, or restrict access to it so that you can move forward with gaining compensation from your writings.
The one stand-out that will be different form this is our Conspiracy Masters, where we are establishing a system of compensation based on the traffic their contributions generate.
reply posted on 13-7-2009 @ 03:17 PM by SkepticOverlord
July, 2009: UPDATE
There has been some confusion (and probably will continue to be, no matter what we do) and horrible misunderstandings about what happens to your content when you post it to AboveTopSecret.com.
First, to make things crystal clear, when you post to ATS we do not own your content. You still own it, but by posting here, you grant us the following:
1) The right to publish what you post online, giving credit to you, and referencing the context of the thread in which you posted.
2) The status of a limited "authorized agent" should there be a dispute regarding unattributed use of your content on other sites or publishing mediums.
3) The right to republish what you post in other forms -- for example, excerpts of many posts were included in our book.
4) The ability, as needed, to modify what you've posted -- for example, if we receive notice of a copyright violation in all or a portion of your post.
If you post something to ATS, you can still:
1) Post it elsewhere -- though multi-form cross-posting is generally considered bad Internet etiquette
2) Publish it elsewhere for fame and fortune -- there have been two occasions where members had works accepted by magazines that included portions of their posts on ATS, and the magazine requested removal before paying the author... we complied and removed the posts that ended up affording our members some personal income.
Again, we never have, nor never will claim ownership of what you post to ATS, only the right to publish it, and the ability to defend the integrity of our threads.
There are some exceptions.
For example, John Barbour entered an exclusive online distribution agreement with us for his Garrison Tapes. This is the first opportunity, in many years, where he's been able to derive personal income from US-distribution of this movie. We share a significant portion of the ad revenue with him, as is the case with all our pro-video titles.
Our policies are not intended to stifle discussion.
Far from it. In fact, the guidelines of our creative commons deed are very liberal, more liberal than many other sites. We allow and encourage entire posts to be copied to other sites, as long as the author is given credit, and there is a clearly labeled link-back to the post and thread. The reason for the link is to provide readers (on the other site) a means to view the post in context with the full thread... as is most often the case, threads evolve and context can be vitally important.
Our policies are not intended to restrict your content to ATS.
Over the past year, I've personally given out more than forty authorizations to people looking to use the content of ATS members in various educational endeavors. Most often the intended medium was print, and in those cases permission was granted as long as the ATS member name was cited as the author, ATS was indicated as the source, and the title of the thread was used to define the source content.
I hope this clears things up.
There has been some confusion (and probably will continue to be, no matter what we do) and horrible misunderstandings about what happens to your content when you post it to AboveTopSecret.com.
First, to make things crystal clear, when you post to ATS we do not own your content. You still own it, but by posting here, you grant us the following:
1) The right to publish what you post online, giving credit to you, and referencing the context of the thread in which you posted.
2) The status of a limited "authorized agent" should there be a dispute regarding unattributed use of your content on other sites or publishing mediums.
3) The right to republish what you post in other forms -- for example, excerpts of many posts were included in our book.
4) The ability, as needed, to modify what you've posted -- for example, if we receive notice of a copyright violation in all or a portion of your post.
If you post something to ATS, you can still:
1) Post it elsewhere -- though multi-form cross-posting is generally considered bad Internet etiquette
2) Publish it elsewhere for fame and fortune -- there have been two occasions where members had works accepted by magazines that included portions of their posts on ATS, and the magazine requested removal before paying the author... we complied and removed the posts that ended up affording our members some personal income.
Again, we never have, nor never will claim ownership of what you post to ATS, only the right to publish it, and the ability to defend the integrity of our threads.
There are some exceptions.
For example, John Barbour entered an exclusive online distribution agreement with us for his Garrison Tapes. This is the first opportunity, in many years, where he's been able to derive personal income from US-distribution of this movie. We share a significant portion of the ad revenue with him, as is the case with all our pro-video titles.
Our policies are not intended to stifle discussion.
Far from it. In fact, the guidelines of our creative commons deed are very liberal, more liberal than many other sites. We allow and encourage entire posts to be copied to other sites, as long as the author is given credit, and there is a clearly labeled link-back to the post and thread. The reason for the link is to provide readers (on the other site) a means to view the post in context with the full thread... as is most often the case, threads evolve and context can be vitally important.
Our policies are not intended to restrict your content to ATS.
Over the past year, I've personally given out more than forty authorizations to people looking to use the content of ATS members in various educational endeavors. Most often the intended medium was print, and in those cases permission was granted as long as the ATS member name was cited as the author, ATS was indicated as the source, and the title of the thread was used to define the source content.
I hope this clears things up.
reply posted on 13-7-2009 @ 03:34 PM by ATSfan
theres been some talk about this over on glp. however, seems some people are a bit suspicious about glps 'intentions'...?
glpwatchdog.blogspot.com...
.
.
