Bug: MW allows incompatible remix CC licensing terms on upload form

The makerworld upload form allows the selection of any license instead of just compatible ones when a remix is uploaded.

In the US, 17 U.S.C. § 512(c)(1)(A) provides a “safe harbor” to the online service provider only when it “does not have actual knowledge that the material or an activity using the material on the system or network is infringing;”.

This would suggest that every person who has had their models remixed and published on makerworld under an incompatible license has cause for action against Shenzhen Tuozhu Technology Co., Ltd directly instead of just the person who upload the remix.

So maybe fix it?

Arbitrary example:

this CC-BY-SA model:

was remixed to this CC-BY-NC-SA model:

Which is an incompatible license. (SA in the original requires it be exactly CC-BY-SA)

1 Like

This is most likely licencing code oversight.

Based on handy chart I found on Creative Commons Remixes - Collections and Remixes: What’s the Difference? - Research Guides at Hayden Memorial Library

it seems that when original licence is “SA” all the remixes are obligated to use same exact licence.

Also, there’s another problem that I see overlooked everywhere (or at least a lot): ND licences do not allow remixes.

1 Like

Not sure what you mean, the upload form allows you to select any license for the remix regardless of the original license.

That’s the problem, you need to follow the guidelines of the original license, not be able to choose whatever you feel like :slight_smile:

2 Likes

Yup, this person uploaded a “remix” as standard license file, and MW let him apparently, which should just not be allowed to happen.
In this case it’s not a remix but a sort of leeching where the person wants the remix linking and search result clicks, and designed something different. I’m flattered but they shouldn’t be allowed to then mark it as SA.


That’s exactly what I meant - the code for licence choice just disallows remixing “standard licence”, but allows remixing all CC and selecting any licence for derivative work. That’s missing code logic IMHO. By “oversight” I meant “inadvertent omission or error”