Just a thought as bad this is, WMF could just run a server in a
juristiction where copyright isnt an issue but WMF does need to act in a
socially responsible way and with the highest standards of respect for our
goals, our community and the laws.

Maybe it would be possible to have a limited fair use type provision on
Commons for important images where they are out of copyright in the country
of origin, but not in the US, with a minimum requirement of the work being
used in two different language wikipedias. It'll be complicated to enforce
and will take a lot of discussion to work out the policy and processes....




On 18 June 2014 20:39, Gerard Meijssen <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hoi,
> Given the investment in so many data centres in the USA and the lack of
> investment in cache servers around the world this is highly unlikely to be
> even feasible.
> Thanks,
>      GerardM
>
>
> On 18 June 2014 14:33, Neel Gupta <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> First SOPA, now This !
>> US Copyright laws restricting Wikimedia servers from hosting what could
>> be Public Domain around the World.
>> ...At this point, I think it would be a good idea to start a discussion
>> on whether to move the Wikimedia servers out of US jurisdiction.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Rama Neko <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Commons is supposed to host images that we can guarantee are Free. It is
>>> by hosting images that we wish were free, or images that we could imagine
>>> to be Free, or images that we don't know to be copyrighted, that we harm
>>> the project. An image for which there is a reasonable doubt is an image
>>> that does not belong on Commons, period.
>>>
>>> As for the question of consensus, it is perfectly proper to ignore
>>> opinions based on wishful thinking or ignorance. This is a technical issue,
>>> and knowledgeable technocrats rightfully have precedence over dilettantes
>>> and militants.
>>>
>>> To conclude, I fully sympathise and concur with those of us who find
>>> national laws and copyright durations to be excessively tilted against
>>> users. I bring to their attention that by twisting and ignoring these laws,
>>> we play into the hand of their defenders: firstly by offering them the
>>> argument that their regulations do not in fact stifle expression; and
>>> secondly by exposing ourselves to legal action that can be brought to bear
>>> whenever convenient to their interests.
>>>    -- Rama
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 17 June 2014 08:17, Neel Gupta <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Then it will be impossible to upload any image to the commons, except
>>>> by artists & photographers.
>>>> I expect USA to expand copyrights to an additional 100 years, in a
>>>> hundred years, making entrance of Copyrighted works into Public Domain
>>>> impossible.
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Copyright_term.svg
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 6:11 AM, Ryan Kaldari <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Images on Commons must be public domain in both the source country and
>>>>> the US. The images are definitely copyrighted in the US. The question is
>>>>> whether they are copyrighted due to following US formalities or due to the
>>>>> URAA.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Commons-l mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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