On 10/01/11 5:36 AM, Anthony wrote:
On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 6:44 AM, Elias Gabriel Amaral da Silva
tolkiend...@gmail.com wrote:
In practical terms, what they can do? Wikipedia is hosted in US.
Therefore, for a successful takedown, the museum must sue in US.
Well, for one thing, they could sue
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 4:55 AM, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote:
On 10/01/11 5:36 AM, Anthony wrote:
On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 6:44 AM, Elias Gabriel Amaral da Silva
tolkiend...@gmail.com wrote:
In practical terms, what they can do? Wikipedia is hosted in US.
Therefore, for a successful
I think we are fairly safe hosting the images of the original fragments,
even by Israeli law. Israel does not recognize sweat of the brow and
requires a minimal degree of originality to claim copyright.[1][2]
The Israeli Supreme Court did declare that a transcription of the Dead
Sea Scrolls
On 10/03/11 11:34 AM, Ryan Kaldari wrote:
I think we are fairly safe hosting the images of the original fragments,
even by Israeli law. Israel does not recognize sweat of the brow and
requires a minimal degree of originality to claim copyright.[1][2]
Then it is a question of fact. Do these
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 5:34 AM, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote:
I think we are fairly safe hosting the images of the original fragments,
even by Israeli law. Israel does not recognize sweat of the brow and
requires a minimal degree of originality to claim copyright.[1][2]
Does it
On 10/3/11 4:36 PM, John Vandenberg wrote:
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 5:34 AM, Ryan Kaldarirkald...@wikimedia.org wrote:
I think we are fairly safe hosting the images of the original fragments,
even by Israeli law. Israel does not recognize sweat of the brow and
requires a minimal degree of
(Not because they actually do want it but don't have the resources.
Not because it is hard for an external body to do but might be easier
for the WMF to do. No, those aren't possible at all.)
Well, given that an image filter is a technically easy proposition, no, its
not because of lack of
