greenfog:
[ads removed]
Over the last months we released a variety of icon sets, tools and templates, but now we would like to release something a bit different for a change. In this…
I’m sorry, but how is this a “freebie”? Is the implication that download for personal use must be explicitly granted by the copyright holder?
If it is, have some bad news—viewing an image on a computer screen across the Internet still involves the transfer of the photo’s data from a server to a local machine—if you can see it, you have downloaded it.
This is a great case illustrating the uselessness of a traditional copyright—how can I print this out without “transferring” it to a piece of paper, let alone a mousepad as the designer implies? What if someone else—the boss the article suggests I try to impress, for example—looks at it on my screen or after I’ve printed it? I’ve violated the copyright by making it “available for use”!
Creative Commons exists specifically to fulfill this void between a traditional meatspace copyright and the realities of digital technology. This image would be far better off released under BY-NC-ND, with specified attribution of 1) the author’s name and 2) a link to this Smashing Magazine article.
That way it could be spread directly across people’s blogs or flickr or any other damn thing that allows <a href>. Though I will readily attest that the Internet is full of dickheads who can’t seem to copy and paste a URL, I will also readily attest that there’s more to be gained than lost with a CC license.
Additionally, the more of the Internet that sees and understands Creative Commons licenses, the more widespread their use and adoption will become. As a web user, you get more stuff, and as a creator, you get more credit, in some cases more money, more stuff to re-use, and a wider audience.
Or you can keep posting stuff with confusing and awkwardly-worded licenses that essentially force people to pirate.
Your call.