Topic on User talk:Goo Monster

Hi! I see you listed this in the summary for File:Internet likes villain.jpg:

Artist says that it is okay to repost her art, but she likes it to be attributed to her and unmodified. Someone else profiting her image is when she gets upset. I think there is a creative commons that covers her policy, but I'm not sure which.

That's a big one. I'll take it piece by piece:

• "attributed to her" is Attribution (the short form is "BY")
• "unmodified" is No Derivatives (the short form is "ND")
• "Someone else profiting her image is when she gets upset" is Non-Commercial (the short form is "NC")

Putting those together in the order that Creative Commons likes is "CC-BY-NC-ND" - and we have a license template for that (so I don't need to make a new license template), which I've just added to the file's page.

If it was formally published under "CC-BY-NC-ND", would she be able to change the type of license it has later?

That's a good question... @Looney Toons knows more about changing CC licenses after the fact than I do.

Ummm, not really. I only know what I've learned in passing here. @Labster is better informed than I am, I believe.

Well, Sarah didn't say the license was a formal CC-BY-NC-ND. Maybe her policy is a de-facto CC-BY-NC-ND that still allows her to change her policy on how others can use her art if the desire strikes her. And if there is a difference that substantial, maybe we should remove the CC-BY-NC-ND tag. (although I suspect (with absolutely no evidence) the main thing is she likes to draw and has no interest in learning copy write law).

You are correct - if she didn't actually say that that is the license that applies, then it doesn't.