Re: 錄影授權書 and 講者行前通知

[Brian Cameron <brian cameron oracle com>]

李柏鋒 (Pofeng Lee):

> That could be a good (but complicated) idea to add still pictures
> related issue in this form.
>
> I would like to remind that the copyright of the photography
> is owned by the photographer not the speaker.

But this issue is also true for any person taking video recording also.
With videos, the copyright is owned by the videographer.

> The speaker owns the portrait right.
> ( not the copyright of the photography )

Yes, so it is good to make sure they give permission to make use of
their portrait in any reasonable media.

> It would be very nice to ask the speaker's permission before
> taking the pictures, but it is a little bit strange to ask the speakers
> to release the photos under specific license, because the speaker did
> not own the copyright of the pictures.

The release form just means that a photographer does not need to ask
the speaker's permission if they are agreeable to this license.  If
a photographer wants to release photos of a person under a different
license, then the photographer would need to sign a separate release
form.  Our form is non-exclusive, so it doesn't prevent people from
doing this if they want.

So, I wouldn't think this is a problem.

> For the still pictures, the photographers should be the volunteers from
> COSCUP Team, and I believe they would
> be very happy to release the pictures under CC-BY-SA 2.0 or 3.0.

If we want the agreement to specify that only photos and videos taken
by official representatives of the conference, we could add such
language.  However, I don't think it is really necessary to specify
this.

> For the video, I personally would like to know if CC-
> Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 (or 3.0)  is GASC's final decision ?

It is a good license.  We can consider a different license if you have
a preference.

> If it
> does, it would a big problem for us, and I must go back to discuss with
> our colleagues.

The license only requires providing attribution and that any
modifications must be under the same license.  What is problematic
about those conditions?

Do your colleagues need some photos or videos under a non-free license?
If so, can your colleagues ask speakers to sign a separate release form
so that any media is dual-licensed?

Brian