Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote in message
news:b8ceeef70906112226t56603352y27a9fc22fbea9...@mail.gmail.com...
On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 2:26 AM, Sam Kornsmo...@gmail.com wrote:
(Photo: a
href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Houses_of_Parliament.jpg;Wikipedia/a)
I imagine that would
Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote in message
news:4a32892b.90...@telus.net...
Sam Korn wrote:
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 6:26 AM, Steve Bennett wrote:
On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 2:26 AM, Sam Korn wrote:
(Photo: a
href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Houses_of_Parliament.jpg;Wikipedia/a)
Andrew Turvey andrewrtur...@googlemail.com wrote in message
news:5465232.561244846011734.javamail.sys...@atsl_laptop...
- Unionhawk unionhawk.site...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, I mean, what difference does it make? I guess it probably should
have a link, but, honestly, with the number of
AGK wiki...@googlemail.com wrote in message
news:a342424e0906051009g38d27b9dked2193916a6dc...@mail.gmail.com...
If not, is there a group of people somewhere who chase up copyvios like
this?
I suppose the Free Software Foundation would be the body responsible for
chasing up copyright
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 10:02 PM, Michael Peelem...@mikepeel.net wrote:
snip
In the case of the images that I've taken myself and uploaded to
Commons (CC-BY-SA license), pretty much the only thing I'm after for
myself is attribution. I believe that's a standard stance amongst
photographers
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 10:02 PM, Michael Peelem...@mikepeel.net wrote:
On 12 Jun 2009, at 11:13, Sam Korn wrote:
Right. I certainly agree that it would be better to name the author.
But when articles are reused, they generally link to the Wikipedia
article without giving a list of
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 6:26 AM, Steve Bennettstevag...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 2:26 AM, Sam Kornsmo...@gmail.com wrote:
(Photo: a
href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Houses_of_Parliament.jpg;Wikipedia/a)
I imagine that would satisfy *almost* everyone.
Hell no. You didn't
On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 2:26 AM, Sam Kornsmo...@gmail.com wrote:
(Photo: a
href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Houses_of_Parliament.jpg;Wikipedia/a)
I imagine that would satisfy *almost* everyone.
Hell no. You didn't even credit the author.
Photo: WikiWitch at Wikipedia, under GFDL.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Well, I mean, what difference does it make? I guess it probably should
have a link, but, honestly, with the number of Wikipedia images being
reused these days, I don't think it would be worth it to attempt to
track them all down...
- --Unionhawk
2009/6/6 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
no synopsis can substitute for what the text of the
licensehttp://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:GNU_Free_Documentation_Licensesays,
and if in doubt the reuser should seek a proper legal opinion (
On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 12:21 AM,
Falcorianalex.public.account+enwikimailingl...@gmail.com wrote:
We have a policy:
[[Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content]]
It would be good to have something that specifically referred to reuse
of images, since I think that is probably more common than reusing
2009/6/6 Sam Korn smo...@gmail.com:
On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 12:21 AM,
Falcorianalex.public.account+enwikimailingl...@gmail.com wrote:
We have a policy:
[[Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content]]
It would be good to have something that specifically referred to reuse
of images, since I think
2009/6/6 Angela bees...@gmail.com:
On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 2:26 AM, Sam Kornsmo...@gmail.com wrote:
(Photo: a
href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Houses_of_Parliament.jpg;Wikipedia/a)
I imagine that would satisfy *almost* everyone.
Adding the license wouldn't be much harder:
(Photo: a
On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 12:55 PM, genigeni...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/6/6 Angela bees...@gmail.com:
On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 2:26 AM, Sam Kornsmo...@gmail.com wrote:
(Photo: a
href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Houses_of_Parliament.jpg;Wikipedia/a)
I imagine that would satisfy *almost*
2009/6/5 Andrew Turvey andrewrtur...@googlemail.com:
Can I put the question in another way:
Suppose a media company lawyer came to us and said we've found this photo on
Wikimedia that we would like to use - how can we do this and comply with the
copyright
What would we say in response?
Is
2009/6/6 AGK wiki...@googlemail.com:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Reusing_content_outside_Wikimedia
was
written specifically to deal with this precise question.
And a very good guide it is. It would be ideal if more media organisations
followed its advice.
It's useful to
So, how *should* it be attributed? I'm confused...
Go Freedom!
Unionhawk
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Andrew Turvey
andrewrtur...@googlemail.comwrote:
It's great to see more and more people re-using Wikipedia content. such as
this: http://euobserver.com/9/28232
However, does this
- Casey Brown cbrown1023...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Casey Brown cbrown1023...@gmail.com
Well, that's the media. :-) They're used to being able to just say
random things like source: Reuters that make no sense whatsoever.
;-)
Yeah - but the difference there is that they're actually
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 10:40 PM, Unionhawkunionhawk.site...@gmail.com wrote:
So, how *should* it be attributed? I'm confused...
(Photo: a
href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Houses_of_Parliament.jpg;Wikipedia/a)
I imagine that would satisfy *almost* everyone.
--
Sam
PGP public key:
Stephen Bain wrote:
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 6:40 AM, Andrew wrote:
However, does this comply with the GDFL license? All it says by way of
attribution is (Photo: wikipedia)
No. What's needed is:
1) A copy of the GFDL. For web uses, a link to the GFDL is generally
accepted as
Andrew Turvey wrote:
-- Casey Brown wrote:
Well, that's the media. :-) They're used to being able to just say
random things like source: Reuters that make no sense whatsoever.
;-)
Yeah - but the difference there is that they're actually paying Reuters for
it and using it with
If not, is there a group of people somewhere who chase up copyvios like
this?
I suppose the Free Software Foundation would be the body responsible for
chasing up copyright violations, but, if they are anything like almost every
other non-profit in the world, they probably don't have the time
David Gerard wrote:
2009/6/4 Andrew Turvey:
It's great to see more and more people re-using Wikipedia content. such as
this: http://euobserver.com/9/28232
However, does this comply with the GDFL license? All it says by way of
attribution is (Photo: wikipedia)
If not, is there a group
...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Sam Korn smo...@gmail.com
To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Friday, 5 June, 2009 17:26:32 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] GDFL compliance
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 10:40 PM, Unionhawk wrote: So, how *should
+00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland,
Portugal
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] GDFL compliance
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 10:40 PM, Unionhawk wrote: So, how *should* it
be attributed? I'm confused... (Photo: Wikipedia ) I imagine that would
satisfy *almost* everyone. -- Sam PGP public key:
http
On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 2:26 AM, Sam Kornsmo...@gmail.com wrote:
(Photo: a
href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Houses_of_Parliament.jpg;Wikipedia/a)
I imagine that would satisfy *almost* everyone.
Adding the license wouldn't be much harder:
(Photo: a
It's great to see more and more people re-using Wikipedia content. such as
this: http://euobserver.com/9/28232
However, does this comply with the GDFL license? All it says by way of
attribution is (Photo: wikipedia)
If not, is there a group of people somewhere who chase up copyvios like
2009/6/4 Andrew Turvey andrewrtur...@googlemail.com:
It's great to see more and more people re-using Wikipedia content. such as
this: http://euobserver.com/9/28232
However, does this comply with the GDFL license? All it says by way of
attribution is (Photo: wikipedia)
If not, is there a
(source:Wikipedia) quoted a few times on media pictures now.
- David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
From: David Gerard dger...@gmail.com
To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Thursday, 4 June, 2009 21:55:23 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland,
Portugal
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l
2009/6/4 Andrew Turvey andrewrtur...@googlemail.com:
Just out of interest, what is doing it right in this context. Is a link to
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f1/Houses_of_Parliament.jpg
plus an extended text along the lines of, say, the bottom of
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 6:40 AM, Andrew
Turveyandrewrtur...@googlemail.com wrote:
However, does this comply with the GDFL license? All it says by way of
attribution is (Photo: wikipedia)
No. What's needed is:
1) A copy of the GFDL. For web uses, a link to the GFDL is generally
accepted as
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 5:41 PM, Andrew
Turveyandrewrtur...@googlemail.com wrote:
Just out of interest, what is doing it right in this context. Is a link to
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f1/Houses_of_Parliament.jpg
plus an extended text along the lines of, say, the bottom of
32 matches
Mail list logo
