A short note on an individual basis of my own (not community's behalf):
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Philippe Beaudette
phili...@wikimedia.org wrote:
To be very clear: a decision on English Wikipedia to take action on this is
not binding on Commons.
Fine but it wouldn't be a bad idea to
Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org writes:
I think Liam and Dominic are correct on this. Most cultural
institutions, especially libraries, are very much on our side on
copyright issues.
I have no doubt on this.
But see my concrete real-world example, where the Archives of Toulouse
uses
On 14 January 2012 10:15, Bastien Guerry b...@altern.org wrote:
Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org writes:
I think Liam and Dominic are correct on this. Most cultural
institutions, especially libraries, are very much on our side on
copyright issues.
I have no doubt on this.
But see my
On 14 January 2012 10:58, Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org wrote:
I'm seeing a rough consensus for action on English Wikipedia, and
German Wikipedians seem to be up for acting in solidarity, but, as
I've said on the page on enwiki, I don't see how enwiki consensus for
a SOPA action ought to bind
On Sat, 14 Jan 2012 10:58:41 +, Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org wrote:
I think the concern will be dependent on whether Commons is covered in
the blackout (and whether the 'full' shutdown goes ahead or the
'pop-up plus banners' that seems to be getting most traction on
enwiki).
I'm seeing
On 14 January 2012 12:20, Yaroslav M. Blanter pute...@mccme.ru wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2012 10:58:41 +, Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org wrote:
I think the concern will be dependent on whether Commons is covered in
the blackout (and whether the 'full' shutdown goes ahead or the
'pop-up plus
To be very clear: a decision on English Wikipedia to take action on this is
not binding on Commons.
___
Philippe Beaudette
Head of Reader Relations
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
415-839-6885, x 6643
phili...@wikimedia.org
To check my email volume (and thus know approx how long it
Le 14/01/2012 08:20, Yaroslav M. Blanter a écrit :
On Sat, 14 Jan 2012 10:58:41 +, Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org wrote:
I think the concern will be dependent on whether Commons is covered in
the blackout (and whether the 'full' shutdown goes ahead or the
'pop-up plus banners' that seems to
Forwarding an alarming e-mail for your interest.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Wade Mollison i...@demandprogress.org
Date: 2012/1/13
Subject: Wikipedia
To: \emijrp\ emi...@gmail.com
Emily,
Quick request: Wikipedia is considering going dark to protest SOPA and
PIPA, the Internet
There is a dedicated website too.
http://www.wikipediablackout.com/
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 9:58 AM, emijrp emi...@gmail.com wrote:
Forwarding an alarming e-mail for your interest.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Wade Mollison i...@demandprogress.org
Date: 2012/1/13
Subject:
Relatedly, where is the updated, latest discussion on what Wikimedia's
response (if anything) is going to be?
Presumably there is are several on-wiki debates, but because there are
different potential levels of blackout (all project blackout, geo-located
blackout, single-project blackout,
Just a quick note that it was the subject of yesterday's office hours,
which includes several links to on-Wiki discussions:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours/Office_hours_2012-01-12
Maggie
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 4:21 AM, Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote:
Relatedly, where is
A nice side-effect of such a black-out will be to send GLAM
institutions this message: Don't use Wikipedia as a storage
service, use your own websites and free licenses instead.
I would not spend time, energy and money on a service that
can block my contents without even warning and/or asking
On 13 January 2012 13:27, Bastien Guerry b...@altern.org wrote:
A nice side-effect of such a black-out will be to send GLAM
institutions this message: Don't use Wikipedia as a storage
service, use your own websites and free licenses instead.
I would not spend time, energy and money on a
I would not spend time, energy and money on a service that
can block my contents without even warning and/or asking me.
Especially if I'm a public service, which is often the case
for GLAMs.
--
Bastien
...
Temporarily disabling access in protest is not the same as blocking my
Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com writes:
We have never proposed Wikimedia Commons as a storage service for
GLAMs. We have always said they should have their own catalogue and
share copies of their multimedia with us (and everyone else) under a
free license. That gives provenance and
On 13 January 2012 14:22, Bastien Guerry b...@altern.org wrote:
Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com writes:
We have never proposed Wikimedia Commons as a storage service for
GLAMs. We have always said they should have their own catalogue and
share copies of their multimedia with us (and
On 13 January 2012 09:45, Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13 January 2012 14:22, Bastien Guerry b...@altern.org wrote:
I still expect some of them to react in a way that will make them think
twice before participating to an upload project. But maybe that's just
me being
I think Liam and Dominic are correct on this. Most cultural
institutions, especially libraries, are very much on our side on
copyright issues. For example, the American Library Association
enthusiastically joined us in our amicus brief on Golan v. Holder last
year. While there are a few art
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 1:21 AM, Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote:
Relatedly, where is the updated, latest discussion on what Wikimedia's
response (if anything) is going to be?
Presumably there is are several on-wiki debates, but because there are
different potential levels of blackout
Bastien Guerry wrote:
A nice side-effect of such a black-out will be to send GLAM
institutions this message: Don't use Wikipedia as a storage
service, use your own websites and free licenses instead.
I think this would make a much better CentralNotice banner...
Apparently there's now a vote
21 matches
Mail list logo
