On 08/20/2013 08:51 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote: > Hi, > > Few months ago, I've taken this picture [0] and attended with it in the > contest of F19 Supplemental Wallpapers [1]. I've released that image > under the terms of CC BY 3.0 license [2] (clearly stated at [1]). > > When F19 was released and I saw the DVDs, I saw my picture at the back > side of the DVD cover. Without any attribution. I said to myself, let it > be. > > Later on, I saw my picture on Flock badges. Without attribution. > > It's also on (the mockup of ?) Fedora Magazine front page [3], again, I > see no attribution. > > Just to be clear, I'm not mad or something like that, I'm just curious. > In my eyes, Fedora was always very strict about licenses and stuff like > that. > > If anyone would come to me and say "Hey, Miro, we want to use that image > in XYZ, but your attribution would make it look weird, can we use it to > promote Fedora, without your attribution?" I would definitely say yes. > But nobody had done this before the image was used. > > So I would like to know: Signing CLA, did I abandoned my right to use > license with attribution? Or someone screwed it? You did not abandon your rights, the FPCA does not do that. I've spoken to Ryan Lerch (the designer who made the DVD cover and the Flock badges), and he is very apologetic. The lack of attribution is an oversight, not an intentional attempt to leave out your attribution. Please let me know if there is anything we can do for those issues, and we will be more vigilant in the future. It is perhaps noteworthy that we used several other Creative Commons licensed works at Flock, including the picture of the Carolina Wren used on the tshirt (and for which, we gave attribution in the Flock conference booklet that all attendees received). I've CC'd Ruth Suehle to add attribution to the Fedora Magazine use case. Again, I'm very sorry that this occurred, and we will do our best to prevent such mistakes from happening in the future. ~tom == Fedora Project