wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
> It's my understanding that "sweat of the brown" does not create a
> copyright at all. That was the entire argument behind the claim that
> phonebooks had no copyright protection. Similarly pure indexes have no
> copyright protection since they exhibit no creativity at all
On 04/25/11 3:30 PM, Joan Goma wrote:
> But If I licensed the work under a free license They only can make the
> derivative work under the condition of releasing it under the same license.
> If they fail to do it they must talk to me and ask for a new license. Then
> I have the right to ask for a
On 26/04/11 02:37, Dan Collins wrote:
[...]
>> The main problem is that they are plain text instead of HTML.
>
> This is most certainly /not/ a problem. What would be a problem would be if
> MediaWiki chose to jump on the bandwagon of embedding huge external images
> in emails to users. Bandwidth?
It's my understanding that "sweat of the brown" does not create a copyright
at all.
That was the entire argument behind the claim that phonebooks had no
copyright protection.
Similarly pure indexes have no copyright protection since they exhibit no
creativity at all.
Bad news for indexers.
On 04/25/11 7:06 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
> I always thought that translations were considered "wholely derivative",
> that is that a new copyright is *not* created, by translating.
It would be nice if things could be that easy; a third person using the
translation must respect the copyright o
On 26 April 2011 03:06, wrote:
> I always thought that translations were considered "wholely derivative",
> that is that a new copyright is *not* created, by translating.
I would expect that to vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. For
example, jurisdictions that includes some kind of "sweat o
On 04/26/2011 03:56 AM, John Vandenberg wrote:
>> (BTW, related to that, may folk from en.wp raise requirements for so
>> called "consensus" related to page deletion? Something like "at least
>> five users with at least 500 edits" would save many useful material from
>> systemic trolling.)
>
> Do
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 10:55 PM, Fred Bauder wrote:
> > Hi there,
> > look guys someone deleted my pages promoting our work in Kosovo and
> > Albania
> > from my user page saying they are of no use to the wikipedia
> > can someone please comment on that?
> > Gerard was at the event in Albania tha
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 3:56 AM, John Vandenberg wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Milos Rancic wrote:
> > On 04/25/2011 11:53 PM, John Vandenberg wrote:
> >> I have restored a subset of these pages. Some of them would be better
> >> on the Meta or outreach wikis.
> >
> > Thanks, John!
Thanks, John,
I will move them to an outreach page, any tips are welcome.
thanks
mike
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 11:53 PM, John Vandenberg wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 7:39 AM, Gerard Meijssen
> wrote:
> > Hoi,
> > Mike is a well know activist who promotes Open Source and Wikipedia in
> > Alb
I always thought that translations were considered "wholely derivative",
that is that a new copyright is *not* created, by translating.
In a message dated 4/25/2011 1:57:34 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
sainto...@telus.net writes:
On 04/25/11 9:33 AM, Joan Goma wrote:
> My interest in
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Milos Rancic wrote:
> On 04/25/2011 11:53 PM, John Vandenberg wrote:
>> I have restored a subset of these pages. Some of them would be better
>> on the Meta or outreach wikis.
>
> Thanks, John!
>
> Mike, you should ask for help before conclusion of deletion. Disc
On 04/25/2011 11:53 PM, John Vandenberg wrote:
> I have restored a subset of these pages. Some of them would be better
> on the Meta or outreach wikis.
Thanks, John!
Mike, you should ask for help before conclusion of deletion. Discussion
about deletion was small and was a typical example of syst
News and notes: Survey of French Wikipedians; first
Wikipedian-in-Residence at Smithsonian; brief news
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2011-04-25/News_and_notes
In the news: Low-hanging fruit and sustainability; Qwiki on iPad;
sceptic critic; brief news
http://en.wikipedi
On 25 April 2011 23:30, Joan Goma wrote:
> So I see the things this way
You asked if it was a good idea and your understanding was correct. So
far no-one's agreed your understanding is correct and no-one's agreed
your plan of action is a good idea. You appear to insist on doing it
anyway, but d
>
> --
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 13:57:23 -0700
> From: Ray Saintonge
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] foundation-l Digest, Vol 85, Issue 52
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
>
> Message-ID: <4db5e033.4080...@telus.net>
> Content-Type: text/pla
Hoi,
Thanks John !!
Gerard
On 25 April 2011 23:53, John Vandenberg wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 7:39 AM, Gerard Meijssen
> wrote:
> > Hoi,
> > Mike is a well know activist who promotes Open Source and Wikipedia in
> > Albania and Kosovo. People do know him and will find the information he
>
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 7:39 AM, Gerard Meijssen
wrote:
> Hoi,
> Mike is a well know activist who promotes Open Source and Wikipedia in
> Albania and Kosovo. People do know him and will find the information he
> provides.
I have restored a subset of these pages. Some of them would be better
on t
Hoi,
Mike is a well know activist who promotes Open Source and Wikipedia in
Albania and Kosovo. People do know him and will find the information he
provides.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 25 April 2011 22:55, Fred Bauder wrote:
> > Hi there,
> > look guys someone deleted my pages promoting our work i
On 04/25/11 9:33 AM, Joan Goma wrote:
> My interest in a legal opinion is not to know if what they do is legal or
> not.
>
> My interest is to know for example what can they do if I copy the content
> they previously have translated from an English Wikipedia article I have
> previously written.
Th
> Hi there,
> look guys someone deleted my pages promoting our work in Kosovo and
> Albania
> from my user page saying they are of no use to the wikipedia
> can someone please comment on that?
> Gerard was at the event in Albania that was supposedly not helping the
> wikipedia to talk about wikiped
Hi there,
look guys someone deleted my pages promoting our work in Kosovo and Albania
from my user page saying they are of no use to the wikipedia
can someone please comment on that?
Gerard was at the event in Albania that was supposedly not helping the
wikipedia to talk about wikipedia there.
Milo
FT2, 25/04/2011 19:57:
> This is a definite weak area of copyright law, which mainly seems to have
> been designed with the primary purpose of covering identifiable works whose
> reuse was clear, identifiable and economically impacted on the creator. [...]
It's true, but you seem to forget moral
On 04/25/11 10:13 AM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
> I don't believe you could make the case that individual contributors have
> any standing to sue for copyright violations. Similarly, when you contribute
> to the project, you are intrinsically giving up any rights you may think
> you possess in what
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Dan Collins wrote:
> On Apr 19, 2011 8:20 AM, "Tim Starling" wrote:
> >
> > On 19/04/11 19:38, Milos Rancic wrote:
> > > MZMcBride's email about emails reminded me that every automated email
> > > from Wikimedia servers looks like a bunch of programming code.
> >
I don't think so. You license the material to be published subject to
certain conditions. You don't release it without any conditions on the
reuser, nor disclaim ownership of the text. You remain the copyright holder.
If the reuse conditions are breached, you are the owner of the rights that
were
In a message dated 4/25/2011 9:34:16 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
jrg...@gmail.com writes:
> My interest in a legal opinion is not to know if what they do is legal or
> not.
>
> My interest is to know for example what can they do if I copy the content
> they previously have translated from an Engl
On Apr 19, 2011 8:20 AM, "Tim Starling" wrote:
>
> On 19/04/11 19:38, Milos Rancic wrote:
> > MZMcBride's email about emails reminded me that every automated email
> > from Wikimedia servers looks like a bunch of programming code.
> >
> > The first idea was that it would be better to have some bet
My interest in a legal opinion is not to know if what they do is legal or
not.
My interest is to know for example what can they do if I copy the content
they previously have translated from an English Wikipedia article I have
previously written.
How do they put a dollar figure on the damages suff
On 25 April 2011 07:45, Joan Goma wrote:
> They have copied articles from Chinese Wikipedia and translated articles
> from English and Japanese Wikipedia so in my opinion their work is a
> derivative one
This is true.
> and according to the CCSA terms it is also CCSA no mater what
> they say.
On 25 April 2011 08:13, Andre Engels wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Joan Goma wrote:
>> As Ray saids legal prosecution to claim for formal accomplishing of the
>> copyright terms is expensive and difficult. But the same happens the other
>> way around.
>>
>> I would like to have a clea
On 04/24/11 11:45 PM, Joan Goma wrote:
> As Ray saids legal prosecution to claim for formal accomplishing of the
> copyright terms is expensive and difficult. But the same happens the other
> way around.
>
> I would like to have a clear legal opinion about applying the terms without
> going to cour
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Joan Goma wrote:
> As Ray saids legal prosecution to claim for formal accomplishing of the
> copyright terms is expensive and difficult. But the same happens the other
> way around.
>
> I would like to have a clear legal opinion about applying the terms without
> g
This is definitively a wrong approach. Just because part of their
content violate our license does not mean that ALL their content are
under CC-SA-BY. No court will ever follow such a logic.
Greetings
Ting
On 25.04.2011 08:45, wrote Joan Goma:
> As Ray saids legal prosecution to claim for forma
34 matches
Mail list logo
