TheDJ writes

By Nicolás García [CC-BY-SA-2.5] , from Wikimedia Commons I've become aware of two cases of old media trying to take back from the Free media movement. The first is the usage of Wikimedia Commons images by Encyclopedia Britannica online . We are very diligent about copyright in Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons. Multiple groups of people concern themselves with nothing but assessing images and global copyright laws, to make sure our materials are as legal and as Free as they can possibly be. Not so much Brittanica it seems. They happily ignore all license and attribution requirements that these images have, often just giving the username in plaintext (Examples image by Gnangarra , image by Toby Hudson ). For Creative Commons , a full link to the license is required if in any way possible. And just for kindness, a link back to the Wikimedia Commons description page might be nice/a good idea. The Wikimedia sites do the same for Flickr, it's very easy. Britannica, if you are li...

Everyone should look at this video of a talk by Cory Doctorow . People who know me, are aware that I am very concerned about our rights online. This is because every day we become more reliable on the Internet than ever before, yet our liberties our curtailed ever more. No one speaks more about this topic than Cory and really anyone in policy making or in the arts industry should hear him out. Perhaps not because he is right, but at the very least because he presents incredibly sensible counterarguments for anything that the copyright industry claims. Nowhere has the problem of the copyright lobbies, become more clearly than in the letter sent by ASCAP last week , in which they try to warn and recruit their members in their fight against the 'copyleft' and 'pirate' movement, which they basically consider equal. However as many have pointed out , Creative Commons is about freedom of choice for producers and consumers of works alike. What the ASCAP letter shows i...