3 ms·

>Copyright is automatic, restrictive licensing isn't. You're wrong there. The "default" state of affairs for copyright is that the author retains all rights.

• pbhjpbhj 10y ago
  Rights aren't a license. If the creator adds a license they have free rein on the form of license. They don't have to offer a license of course.
  • marcoperaza 10y ago
    Sorry, you're just wrong here. If I publish a video online, it is a copyright violation for you to redistribute it without my permission. I don't need to put a license or even a copyright marking.
    • pbhjpbhj 10y ago
      The point i feel you're missing is that if I'm making my work available for redistribution I must attach a license to it, that license -- for a limited example -- doesn't have to include no public performance (a common license term for movies, play manuscript, music) you can allow it and retain your copyright in full. The context is you providing a video for me to redistribute. You don't have to, say, give me geographic limits.
    • detaro 10y ago
      I think you are completely misunderstanding each other. pbhjpbhj is not saying what you imply and merely pointed out that "downloading copyrighted material" is a misleading phrase since all non-public-domain material is copyrighted. The fact that it's under copyright isn't important, what's important is if it is under a license that allows copying or not.