I'm not sure that a title or short description would be copyrightable "a work must meet minimal standards of originality in order to qualify for copyright"
The photographs however would be covered by copyright.
I don't think that copyright for photographs would be covered by the Craigslist claim though:
'Clicking "Continue" confirms that craigslist is the exclusive licensee of this content, with the exclusive right to enforce copyrights against anyone copying, republishing, distributing or preparing derivative works without its consent.'
I have an original photo and publish it as part of a listing ('the content'). The photo is not a derivative work.
> craigslist is the exclusive licensee of this content, with the exclusive right to enforce copyrights against anyone copying, republishing, distributing or preparing derivative works without its consent.'
> I have an original photo and publish it as part of a listing ('the content'). The photo is not a derivative work.
No, but if someone uses that photo (from the listing) to make something else, that something else is a derivative work, and thus covered by the craigslist license.
I suspect that the craigslist wording isn't intended to be restricted to derivative works. That is, I think that they meant to include content as is in addition to derived work from said content.
Yes, becuse if you grant someone exclusive rights then you need to possess those exclusive rights in the first place. If the material is not protectable, then you don't have any rights to grant to others.
The photographs however would be covered by copyright.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright