SpaceX quietly changes the CC license of official photos, criticism of “ confusing ''
Electric pickup truckCybertruckAn electric car manufacturer that announcedTeslaElon Musk, the founder of the company, is trying to build a broadband network using artificial satellites.Succeeded in launching 60 satellitesOf space development companiesSpaceXAlso operates. Such SpaceX has quietly changed the restrictions on the handling of official photos, and criticism has emerged from some media as being “confusing”.
SpaceX Just Retroactively Put Copyright Restrictions on Its Photos-VICE
SpaceX has official photos on FlickrOfficial SpaceX Photos""NASAButPublic domainIn the same way that official photos are distributed on the Internet, SpaceX initiallyCreative Commons license(CC license)CC0(Public domain) '' was published as photo data.MotherboardAccording to "SpaceX has quietly changed the CC license for the Flickr account in the second week of December 2019".
“CC0” refers to giving up data copyright and allowing it to be treated as the public domain. CC0 is the most unrestricted CC license, and not only can anyone freely share and edit data, it can also handle data freely regardless of profit or non-profit. I can do it. Previously, SpaceX had released photo data with a CC0 license on Flickr, so it was possible for an unrelated third party to create and sell photo books and calendars by combining CC0 photo data.
However, SpaceX has received a CC license for official photo material from CC0.CC 2.0" All CC licenses that have been published so far have been changed to CC 2.0.
CC license information is shown in the lower right corner of the photo displayed on the Flickr page, and you can see the “Display” and “Non-Profit” restrictions that indicate CC 2.0.
Motherboard wrote about this, “ The CC license change imposes restrictions that may cause confusion in how to share and reuse SpaceX photos, '' doubting the sudden CC license change Presents.
When Motherboard contacted SpaceX, the person in charge said, “Even if the CC license is changed, the news media can freely share our photos.” In the first place, “Why did the license change?” It seems that there was no clear answer about the part.
Also, for non-profit organizationsPublic knowledge"The biggest limitation of changing CC licenses is the limitation of commercial use. It's a very vague term that is often confusing. Creative," said John Bergmeyer, an intellectual property expert at While Commons itself tries to clarify its meaning, there are cases where people who publish their work under a CC license have different ideas than Creative Commons. "
Many people may think that “for-profit use” is only when a company operating for-profit uses copyrighted material, but Bergmeyer says “copyright is It does n’t work like that. ” In the area of copyright, where the scope of rights is often difficult to understand and often confusing, what is important is "actual use" and not "user".
For example, if a non-profit organization makes a donation using images, it may be considered commercial use. However, if you use a photo as part of news reports, even if it is a for-profit company that uses the photo, it does not fall under “for-profit use”. Creative Commons has stated that if it is for commercial purposes, it is primarily intended for or directed to commercial gains or monetary compensation.DefinitionIt is said that this “mainly” expression is ambiguous enough to cause confusion.
In addition, technology-related blogsTechdirt.Mike Masnick, who operates the company, described the change in SpaceX as “something frustrating”. He points out that the CC license change is not intended to ban the use of photos at commercial news organizations, but directly to those who are trying to misuse SpaceX photos for commercial purposes.