On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 8:36 PM, Gnangarra <[email protected]> wrote: > its more legal/copyright descriptive, that necessitates the wording than > just release them to the public which can still indicate they have > restrictions
I guess I was just concerned that it was sending the wrong message re: the images, suggesting that the British Library had to put the images into the Public Domain because they (or some other entity) could still hold copyright to them. If it is unclear to the public that slavish reproductions of out-of-copyright 2D works are not themselves eligible for copyright, then perhaps we should work to improve that understanding. It's difficult for a member of the public to exercise his rights unless he knows to what he is entitled! --R _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
