Hi everyone!
I am sorry for replying to this week-old thread, but I just read it and
wanted to take the chance adding a short hint:
There is a (relatively new) Wikimedia working group on EU policy [1] with
an explicit task force for the orphan works issue:
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 1:03 AM, Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com wrote:
2013/5/2 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
On 2 May 2013 04:06, shi zhao shiz...@gmail.com wrote:
see http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/29/err_act_landgrab/
As usual, Orlowski is trolling for clicks. Here's the
On 02/05/13 18:07, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
A document describing best practices for diligent search in Wikimedia
projects can be interesting, but for what Mathias says there is little
use in it as part of this initiative, unless UK government wants to
act in EU to find a common ground
On 2 May 2013 11:25, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com javascript:; wrote:
On 2 May 2013 11:24, geni geni...@gmail.com javascript:; wrote:
However orphan works legislation is a hack designed to allow long
copyright
terms to keep working without upsetting even more people. Its of no use
to
us.
On 2 May 2013 04:06, shi zhao shiz...@gmail.com wrote:
see http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/29/err_act_landgrab/
As usual, Orlowski is trolling for clicks. Here's the actual text:
http://niaccurshi.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/orphan-works-enterprise-and-regulatory.html
- d.
If the Register hates it, that usually indicates to me that it is a
fantastic idea.
On 02/05/2013 1:07 PM, shi zhao shiz...@gmail.com wrote:
see http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/29/err_act_landgrab/
The Act contains changes to UK copyright law which permit the
commercial exploitation of
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 8:41 AM, Craig Franklin
cfrank...@halonetwork.net wrote:
If the Register hates it, that usually indicates to me that it is a
fantastic idea.
The main issues with the EU orphan works directive is that projects
like Wikipedia are not among the priviledged entities and the
On 2 May 2013 07:54, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote:
...
If that's it, the law is completely useless, it just parrots general EU
regulations. The big question in Europe is what qualifies as a diligent
search: I don't know if as usual UK wants to decide on its own, in any case
it
On 2 May 2013 07:54, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote:
If that's it, the law is completely useless, it just parrots general EU
regulations. The big question in Europe is what qualifies as a diligent
search: I don't know if as usual UK wants to decide on its own, in any
case it
On 2 May 2013 04:06, shi zhao shiz...@gmail.com wrote:
see http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/29/err_act_landgrab/
Dude this is Wikimedia-l. Home to rather a lot of copyright nerds. If there
was actually a significant problem with the law don't you think we would
have raised the issue back
2013/5/2 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
On 2 May 2013 04:06, shi zhao shiz...@gmail.com wrote:
see http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/29/err_act_landgrab/
As usual, Orlowski is trolling for clicks. Here's the actual text:
Fae, 02/05/2013 09:20:
On 2 May 2013 07:54, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
...
If that's it, the law is completely useless, it just parrots general EU
regulations. The big question in Europe is what qualifies as a diligent
search: I don't know if as usual UK wants to decide on its own, in any case
2013/5/2 geni geni...@gmail.com:
On 2 May 2013 04:06, shi zhao shiz...@gmail.com wrote:
see http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/29/err_act_landgrab/
Dude this is Wikimedia-l. Home to rather a lot of copyright nerds. If there
was actually a significant problem with the law don't you think
On 2 May 2013 08:37, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2 May 2013 07:54, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote:
If that's it, the law is completely useless, it just parrots general EU
regulations. The big question in Europe is what qualifies as a diligent
search: I don't know if as
On 2 May 2013 08:40, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:
Seriously I've seen this topic floating around on various photography
sites. Any idea who is behind the campaign and why?
The same photography groups who think people shouldn't be allowed to
release pictures under CC by-sa as it undermines
On 2 May 2013 10:54, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2 May 2013 08:37, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2 May 2013 07:54, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote:
If that's it, the law is completely useless, it just parrots general EU
regulations. The big question in Europe
On 2 May 2013 11:24, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:
However orphan works legislation is a hack designed to allow long copyright
terms to keep working without upsetting even more people. Its of no use to
us.
I think you're wrong there. But it's an arguable point, not one that
goes either way.
see http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/29/err_act_landgrab/
The Act contains changes to UK copyright law which permit the
commercial exploitation of images where information identifying the
owner is missing, so-called orphan works, by placing the work into
what's known as extended collective
18 matches
Mail list logo
