2 ms·
Yeah that twitter conversation seems to lend credence to the idea that the Dutch paper or the writer redistributed the story and attempted to bring the presenta
by frankydp 10y ago
Yeah that twitter conversation seems to lend credence to the idea that the Dutch paper or the writer redistributed the story and attempted to bring the presentation with it. I would be curious to see the license that scrollytelling uses, as redistribution is such a key functionality of the industry.
- frankydp 10y agoSome other thoughts and speculation. If the Dutch paper did redistribute/re-license the story to AJ, and if that is in fact a violation of the scrollytelling license, then they(the paper) should be the customer that scrollytelling should be name/shaming and DMCAing. It is also likely that AJ views this(DMCA/blog post) as a upstream licensing issue, and the fact that they have a business relationship with the Dutch paper may lead them to take that up with the paper and not respond to scrollytelling. As, from AJ's point of view, they have already payed a license for the content in this scenario. EDIT: If scrollytelling does not have a straightforward and integrated solution for redistribution licensing then this was bound to happen and probably has before, they just didn't notice because it wasn't an outlet the volume of AJ.