flickr/ghetty licensing

[pittbug]

Last week I was at a conference and uploaded some photos to my flickr stream. One of the photos got picked up and used in an article by a prominent UK newspaper. I have the image licensing set to:

Free to share
Attribution required
Noncommercial
No derivative works

Creative Commons — Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic — CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

I wasn't contacted by the journalist or editor, the article does provide attribution, but they cropped the original photo. Are they still falling within the licensing conditions?

[OsmosisStudios]

Nope: cropping it is against the rules.

[Jim Poor]

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

Nope: cropping it is against the rules.

Are you sure? Cropping isn't really a derivative work.

[andyw]

If cropping totally changed the context or look of the picture then maybe.
However just cropping to fit the layout would not.

[pittbug]

Thanks for the replies. My original photo depicts 3 people sitting behind a table. The photo shown in the story has one of the people cropped out. Would this be considered changing the context?

I have no intention of going after them, but am just looking for some clarity around the licensing.