its more legal/copyright descriptive, that necessitates the wording than
just release them to the public which can still indicate they have
restrictions


On 16 December 2013 11:46, Robinson Tryon <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Emilio J. Rodríguez-Posada
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Quote from full announcement
> >
> http://britishlibrary.typepad.co.uk/digital-scholarship/2013/12/a-million-first-steps.html
> >
> >> We have released over a million images onto Flickr Commons for anyone to
> >> use, remix and repurpose. These images were taken from the pages of
> 17th,
> >> 18th and 19th century books digitised by Microsoft who then generously
> >> gifted the scanned images to us, allowing us to release them back into
> the
> >> Public Domain.
>
> The language used here confuses me. Given the age of the source
> material and the lack of originality in a simple page-scan, wouldn't
> the resulting images already be PD?  Perhaps "release them back into
> the Public Domain," would be better described as "release them to the
> public" ?
>
> --R
>
> _______________________________________________
> Commons-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>



-- 
GN.
Vice President Wikimedia Australia
WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

Reply via email to