Long time ago, I tried to start a petition at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/American_non-acceptance_of_the_rule_of_the_shorter_termto get U.S. to apply rule of the shorter term, but extremely limited signatures and the lack of spam control at http://www.petitiononline.commade me stop the campaign. If anyone is interested, I do allow someone with better skill to take over the petition signature campaign.
Chinese Wikisource also uses PD-EdictGov, similar to English Wikisource, but https://zh.wikisource.org/wiki/Template:PD-EdictGov does warn Hong Kongers and Singaporeans that many English-speaking countries and areas, including English- and Chinese-speaking Hong Kong and Singapore, do copyright their own governmental works. For Point 9 to get works by U.S. states added to public domain, PD-EdictGov already does it for some but not all such works. Jusjih Administrator on Meta, Commons, English and Chinese Wikipedia, Wiktionary, Wikisource, Wikiquote Message: 5 > Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 22:46:41 +0700 > From: John Vandenberg <[email protected]> > To: Wikimedia Commons Discussion List <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Commons-l] Priorities for copyright and freedom (was: > Copyright of deep space objects) > Message-ID: > < > cao9u_z4o2a_dtdkwanutd_t4dafjoecnpn+210hpsdxjxay...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > On English wikisource we use the absence of case law regarding foriegned > government and judicial documents as sufficient justification for all these > being PD in the US. > > See http://enws.org/Template:PD-GovEdict< > http://enws.org/Template:PDGovEdict> > > Most countries explicitly refuse copyright on these works. It would be good > to have a universal declararion that these works are PD worldwide. > > John Vandenberg. > sent from Galaxy Note > On Sep 18, 2012 9:01 PM, "Samuel Klein" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > A lovely exercise. I would put freedom and accessibility of legal > > documents, from government standards to case law, high on that list. > > Starting in larger countries where there is already motion to make this > > happen. SJ > > > > On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 12:30 AM, Michael Snow <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > >> On 9/17/2012 5:22 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote: > >> > >> Personally, I would prefer that people pursue freedom of panorama before > >> we pursue "freedom of deep space objects". The later I would put pretty > far > >> down the priority list, actually. How about the following agenda: > >> > >> 1. Freedom of orphaned works > >> 2. Freedom of panorama in U.S. > >> 3. Get Library of Congress to digitize all U.S. copyright records > >> 4. Get U.S. to apply rule of the shorter term > >> 5. Get U.K. to officially kill sweat of the brow > >> 6. Repeal database rights in EU > >> 7. Repeal Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act > >> 8. Fix absurd copyright terms in Mexico > >> 9. Get works by U.S. states added to public domain > >> 10. Freedom of deep space objects > >> .... > >> 99. Profit > >> > >> I'd probably use a different order, but that would be quibbling. I think > >> just the thought of prioritizing like this is a good exercise, and would > >> love to hear how other people stack up these priorities. It's an > >> interesting challenge to balance which of these ideas would have the > most > >> impact with which are the most realistically achievable in the near > future. > >> > >> --Michael Snow > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Commons-l mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > > Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj > ...... >
_______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
