Comments on: Oh Noes, they’re taking your bits!

By: joshp

joshp — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 01:49:06 +0000

Yes.
I like the idea of self hosted services connected thru a central registry,
but if you MUST go with flicker, google, etc…I really like the idea of a new “Web Hostable” license.

By: Mike Linksvayer

Mike Linksvayer — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 23:39:05 +0000

http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/its_time_for_a_new_terms_of_service_regime.php came to a similar conclusion.

+1 on both asides. :)

By: Greg

Greg — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 23:30:56 +0000

@moo
Interesting idea. Something that is basically: “you can host my content, display it for third party users of your site, but not use my content in any promotional material or knowingly transfer said content to any third party hosting service.”

That part after the “but…” seems like it would be pretty hard to define legally and consistently, and at the same time convey the general message you propose.

For reference, see all of the current discussion about what constitutes a “NonCommercial” use of a work. Even with the carefully crafted legal code from Creative Commons there is still some doubt that anyone can say for certain a given use is or is not a Commercial Use.

But, your idea is interesting.

By: moo

moo — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 23:24:49 +0000

Perhaps a useful thing would be an additional creative commons license you could tack on, called “Web Hostable” or something, which specifically granted anyone you uploaded it too the rights necessary to host and display it to other users.

If the big players accepted this type of license, users wouldnt have to worry about varied and over the top EULA clauses just to protect the hosts.