So, any suggestions?

  -- とある白い猫  (To Aru Shiroi Neko)


On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 2:34 PM, とある白い猫 <[email protected]>wrote:

> So perhaps a new sub category for pages that will handle legal issues that
> need clarification? Ten issues were mentioned so far and each could have
> their own page explaining steps taken or planned to be taken as well as
> other relevant information and links.
>
> While my interest is on the copyright of DSOs by no means it is confided
> to it. :)
>
>   -- とある白い猫  (To Aru Shiroi Neko)
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 10:31 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <[email protected]
> > wrote:
>
>> Samuel Klein, 22/09/2012 19:25:
>>
>>  True. It would be good to have a community platform describing what
>>> should be PD and what clarifications are needed in which current laws to
>>> clarify the matter.
>>>
>>
>> As for PD, Communia's websites could perhaps be expanded in that way, it
>> could be a partnership to propose them?
>> See 
>> http://publicdomainday.org/**node/5<http://publicdomainday.org/node/5>for a 
>> resource list.
>>
>>
>>  Starting with relatively easy ones such as this,
>>> digitized versions of  the law, &c.
>>> That would make it easy to both unify public support behind a specific
>>> idea, and to offer next steps to politicians or lawyers who decide to
>>> get involved in making them happen.  And it would help the WMF,
>>> chapters, and other large movement groups to run a campaign for a
>>> specific change if that is called for.
>>>
>>
>> This is surely something Meta can be used for, but it's probably not that
>> good a platform. But I'm not good at planning political campaigns like this.
>>
>>
>>  Right now there is no permanent collection of these sorts of positions;
>>> the thread on Commons VP is simply archived.  And there are dozens of
>>> other conversations that lead to useful human-readable syntheses of the
>>> current state of international copyright law, which aren't quite
>>> gathered together in one place.  Compiling these discussions and
>>> approaches into a single forum for copyright issues would also be a
>>> general service to everyone who cares about the copyfight.
>>>
>>
>> Factual documentation should not necessarily be all centralised. Commons
>> and Wikisource complement each other quite well, I found; on the other hand
>> (English) Wikipedia's project pages are mostly confusing duplicate content
>> and should mostly be moved elsewhere.
>>
>>
>>  On Meta perhaps?  Currently there are separate discussions on commons,
>>> wikisources, and wikipedias.
>>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/**wiki/Category:Copyright<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Copyright>
>>>  is quite sparse.
>>>
>>
>> The category and its parent need some categorization effort (I did some
>> but not everything), there's much more stuff around although not as much as
>> one could want.
>>
>> Nemo
>>
>>
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> Commons-l mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/commons-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l>
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

Reply via email to