2009/4/23 geni geni...@gmail.com:
Will any of the orange products support wikipedia's video format and
by what mechanism?
(hypothesising here) I expect that would require a converter from Ogg
Theora to 3GP and Ogg Vorbis to MP3 in the first instance.
Gently pressuring phone manufacturers to
Will there be at least a rough guide to where this deal will result in
the logo turning up legitimately?
Yes. We have a list of portals/sites where they plan to profile the
content and the logo. We went through the list but we will review the
use every quarter and reassess as needed.
http://newteevee.com/2009/04/20/achtung-youtube-germany-proposes-federal-id-checks-for-online-video-sites/
German readers - how much of a danger is this? Is Commons enough of a
video site?
- d.
___
foundation-l mailing list
Does the Board get involved in deciding whether to pursue new business
oppurtunities like this, or is that something that is solely handled
by the Foundation Staff?
This question isn't intended as a criticism in any way, I'm just
curious what the relationship is like surrounding big new projects
David Gerard wrote:
2009/4/22 Milos Rancic
And if you want to force any kind of neutrality there, you would get
the same kind of scientific production which existed in East European
countries during 50s and 60s: A (very good) book about ancient Greek
literature starts with 20-30 pages of
2009/4/23 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
http://newteevee.com/2009/04/20/achtung-youtube-germany-proposes-federal-id-checks-for-online-video-sites/
German readers - how much of a danger is this? Is Commons enough of a
video site?
Commons isn't a German site, so I don't see a problem. The WMF
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 6:30 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
... The WMF has
always said that it intends to follow US law only and not try and
cater to the laws of every country in the world - that includes
Germany
{{citation needed}}
Sebastian
2009/4/23 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com:
Commons isn't a German site, so I don't see a problem. The WMF has
always said that it intends to follow US law only and not try and
cater to the laws of every country in the world - that includes
Germany. The article mentions a plan to force
2009/4/23 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
2009/4/23 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com:
Commons isn't a German site, so I don't see a problem. The WMF has
always said that it intends to follow US law only and not try and
cater to the laws of every country in the world - that includes
Can a noncommercial critical website use the trademark of the entity
it critiques in its domain name? Surprisingly, it appears that the
usually open-minded folks at Wikipedia think not.
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/04/wikipedia-threatens-
While I would regard the title of the article as
Interesting - I wonder if this is in any way related to the decisions
underlying the recent board statement on trademarks? Has the Foundation
pursued Wikipedia Review in the same manner?
Nathan
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 1:51 PM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:
Can a noncommercial critical website
2009/4/23 geni geni...@gmail.com:
Can a noncommercial critical website use the trademark of the entity
it critiques in its domain name? Surprisingly, it appears that the
usually open-minded folks at Wikipedia think not.
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/04/wikipedia-threatens-
While I would
2009/4/23 geni geni...@gmail.com:
Can a noncommercial critical website use the trademark of the entity
it critiques in its domain name? Surprisingly, it appears that the
usually open-minded folks at Wikipedia think not.
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/04/wikipedia-threatens-
While I would
Nathan writes:
Interesting - I wonder if this is in any way related to the decisions
underlying the recent board statement on trademarks? Has the Foundation
pursued Wikipedia Review in the same manner?
I can answer that question -- it's wholly unrelated to the recent Board
statement on
2009/4/23 Mike Godwin mnemo...@gmail.com:
If they had transferred the domain name over to us, we'd have paid all their
expenses and forwarded requests for some period of time to any new domain
name they chose to register. There are other alternatives we might have
considered as well. But, take
2009/4/23 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com:
Very true. You have to balance starting high enough that you have room
to come down with not appearing unreasonable. It's a difficult
balancing act, and I'm not sure you got it quite right this time.
Perhaps you could have requested they make
Robert Rohde wrote:
Does the Board get involved in deciding whether to pursue new business
oppurtunities like this, or is that something that is solely handled
by the Foundation Staff?
This question isn't intended as a criticism in any way, I'm just
curious what the relationship is like
Hello colleagues,
At this time I am going to provide you with a small update from
Licensing update committee[1].
On 12 April 2009, a vote concerning the license change[2] was opened and
announced via CentralNotice[3]. Between 12 and 19 April, 10.800 votes where
cast (including those later
2009/4/23 Sebastian Moleski seb...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 6:30 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com
wrote:
... The WMF has
always said that it intends to follow US law only and not try and
cater to the laws of every country in the world - that includes
Germany
{{citation
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 23:31, Huib Laurens abi...@forgotten-beauty.com wrote:
Discussion and questions can be expressed on Meta[4]. So far, 39
people have asked questions there, with most of them being answered
within 24 hours.
Thanks for the interesting statistics.
May i also add
*
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 10:51 AM, syr...@gmx.de wrote:
On Thu, 2009-04-23 at 07:51:27 GMT, David Gerard wrote:
http://newteevee.com/2009/04/20/achtung-youtube-germany-proposes-federal-id-checks-for-online-video-sites/
German readers - how much of a danger is this? Is Commons enough of a
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
...The WMF has
always said that it intends to follow US law only and not try and
cater to the laws of every country in the world - that includes
Germany
{{citation needed}}
What do want a citation for, the WMF
ok - well to try and take sj's sage advice, and move this conversation
forward, I'll focus on one smaller aspect of the bigger issue.
Commons currently has quite a few photographs of people in various states of
undress on beaches. The permission of the subject's for this material, for
example, an
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 10:01 AM, Yaroslav M. Blanter pute...@mccme.ru wrote:
This is under understanding the whole issue is not covered by BLP policy
(I assume if a vagina is shown but the face is not this is not a BLP
issue).
I would feel better if we got model rights whenever using
David Gerard writes:
They're performance artists. This is more performance. They fooled the
EFF into playing along.
This is precisely my own take on the situation.
--Mike
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
2009/4/23 Mike Godwin mnemo...@gmail.com:
David Gerard writes:
They're performance artists. This is more performance. They fooled the
EFF into playing along.
This is precisely my own take on the situation.
I don't disagree. I think we've unnecessarily given them more material
to work with,
Last post on this thread.
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 5:38 PM, private musings thepmacco...@gmail.com wrote:
There are many shots clearly 'posed' - which I personally feel means that
permission is clearly granted by the subject - however there are also many
which don't indicate that the subject
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
I don't disagree. I think we've unnecessarily given them more material
to work with, though, which is unfortunate.
There's always a risk associated with engaging with any kind of performance
artist. These guys
Mike Godwin wrote:
David Gerard writes:
They're performance artists. This is more performance. They fooled the EFF
into playing along.
This is precisely my own take on the situation.
It's basically proven by the notable lack of other art appearing on
their site in the meantime.
2009/4/23 Michael Snow wikipe...@verizon.net:
It's basically proven by the notable lack of other art appearing on
their site in the meantime. I was mildly amused that one of the
sources on their wiki page drew a comparison between the project and
Andrew Keen, which I suppose fits in with the
David Gerard wrote:
2009/4/23 Michael Snow wikipe...@verizon.net:
It's basically proven by the notable lack of other art appearing on
their site in the meantime. I was mildly amused that one of the
sources on their wiki page drew a comparison between the project and
Andrew Keen, which I
2009/4/24 Michael Snow wikipe...@verizon.net:
David Gerard wrote:
2009/4/23 Michael Snow wikipe...@verizon.net:
It's basically proven by the notable lack of other art appearing on
their site in the meantime. I was mildly amused that one of the
sources on their wiki page drew a comparison
I think he was joking. I got a pretty nice laugh out of that.
skype: node.ue
2009/4/23 Sebastian Moleski seb...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com
wrote:
...The WMF has
always said that it intends to follow US law only and not try and
cater
Did you consider starting off with asking for a simple disclaimer? If they
don't have it uploaded and one was sent, disregard previous statement.
From: Mike Godwin mnemo...@gmail.com
To: Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com
Cc: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing
Hi all!
The Wikipedia Usability Initiative conducted a user research study with
SF based Bolt Peters in late March to uncover barriers new editors face.
We are in the process of completing a full report on our methodology,
process and analysis, but wanted to share with you some of the major
I'm not sure what the answer is, and I agree with you that it's not easily
resolved, but it seems to me that some sort of neutrality policy ought to
apply to Commons.
In my opinion the universal form of the NPOV policy is simple - be honest.
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Mike.lifeguard
36 matches
Mail list logo
