You falsely imply that I have been I have been with this project forever and was making decisions.Nard wrote:You imposed them this license, it is your reponsiblility to make things right.
The choice of GPL - for good or for ill - was made by the project's original founders, enforced under Platyna, and then reconsidered by us. Do you not remember that I was one of those who pushed for the possibilty of dual-licensing?
You apparently can't read. CC is a perfectly fine license for new works. However, taking works that were not licensed under CC and then using them under CC *is* stealing.Nard wrote:Saying that CC licence choice is stealing is nothing but laughable.
I've never claimed that tact is one of my strong points. I *do* claim: the ability to be truthful, and the ability to step back from non-time-critical situations in which I have a conflict of interest.Nard wrote:You can think , that I am an idiot, but I am surprised that as a forum moderator you grant yourself the right to say it or to lie about me.
Then that's their problem.Nard wrote: What happens in the case the author's choice is uneffective?
The work can be stolen.
I'm pretty sure that there are some artists who have EXPLICITLY stated that their works are not under CC, only under GPL.
I assume that they read the GPL, particularly the parts that talk about how to apply it to non-software products, and agreed that the particular details of those protections fit them better than CC. For example, CC does not offer patent protection (though I admit I'm not sure just how that would apply to images), and maybe that was something they were passionate about.
According to your understanding of copyright law, I could take everything you have ever created (for TMW or otherwise), without your knowledge (or even if you explicitly refused), relicense it under the you-cant-do-anything-all-rights-reserved license, put it all in a book, sell it, make a movie, and sue anyone else using it (including you), all in the name of the greater good.