[Wikimedia-l] Free open knowledge MOOC, accuracy review, strategy survey

2014-06-08 Thread James Salsman 
Please forgive the crossposting. If you or someone you know who doesn't
understand enough about OERs have a handful of hours per week this fall,
please consider:

https://class.stanford.edu/courses/Education/OpenKnowledge/Fall2014/about

Stanford is trying to flip undergraduate instruction. My standard by which
I judge MOOCs are whether they tell students to refrain from communicating
with the instructors.

Lila Tretikov wrote:
>...
> Let's think big.

Okay, I would like to change my opinion about http://
strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposal:Develop_systems_for_accuracy_review

While I still would love to work on it if I had the spare time, I would
also like to ask the Foundation to try to do it first. I feel the same way
about a strategic objective survey for increasing participation by
nurturing social change likely to increase potential volunteer editor spare
time, and I feel both are about equally important for the future of the
projects.

Best regards,
James Salsman
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sport photo

2014-06-08 Thread Stevie Benton 
The women's FA Cup is a good idea actually. With this, as with any other
idea, if there's a UK volunteer keen to take this forward then please do
get in touch. You can contact me directly if it helps.

WMUK has had some success in arranging credentials for sporting events
actually. Recently a Wikinews reporter was offered funding to cover this
year's Youth Olympic Games in China but had trouble getting accreditation
but after a phonecall or two to the IOC in Geneva, it's all been sorted.
Happy to work on similar things for others.

Stevie


On 7 June 2014 09:49, Pipo Le Clown  wrote:

> It's a shame, the National Summer games for Switzerland where last
> week-end, and I was not aware of it...
>
> I do agree that the para-sport (both disabled and special athletes) needs a
> better coverage (and the french public agrees [1]). Some of us went to the
> 2013 IPC Athletics World Championships last year [2], Pyb was at
> the Meeting d'Athlétisme Paralympique de Paris [3] this week, Ludo and I
> will go to the french paralympic cycling championship next week-end...
> Parasport is (IMO) a good way to try sport photography. People are really
> nice and accessible, and the parasport is in need of more media coverage,
> so they are less likely to rebuff you.
>
> I really like parasport photography, and I'm willing to provide more photos
> and vidéos for Commons. But the main problem is the knowledge of such
> events. They are not advertised in the press, and we must go and seach the
> information on the websites of the federations, which is very time
> consuming. I discover sports and events in the press, when the events are
> over (like the National Summer games...). One of the goals of this thread
> is to find a way to help us (as a community) to better communicate on those
> events (para and not para), and try to have a better coverage (and many
> more photographers all around the world).
>
> Pleclown
>
> [1]
>
> http://www.paralympic.org/news/para-sport-needs-more-media-coverage-says-french-public
> [2]
>
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:2013_IPC_Athletics_World_Championships
> [3]
>
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Meeting_d%27Athl%C3%A9tisme_Paralympique_de_Paris
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Russavia 
> wrote:
>
> > Whilst going through some of the thousands of photos I managed to get
> > a CC release for from the Korean Culture and Information Service,[1] I
> > came across 200 photos from the 2013 Special Olympics World Winter
> > Games held in Pyeongchang, South Korea.[2] There is an "article" (for
> > want of a better word) on English Wikipedia[3] and Chinese
> > Wikipedia[4], where the images do not see any usage. The only usage
> > these images see on our projects (related to the actual sporting
> > event) is a single image on Spanish Wikipedia on its article for the
> > Special Olympics.[5] Funnily enough, the en.wp article for the Special
> > Olympics World Games[6] uses an NFCC image which fails the NFCC
> > criteria.[7]
> >
> > Outside of the 2013 Pyeongchang games, Commons' coverage of Special
> > Olympics is basically non-existent.[8]
> >
> > The next Summer games are in Los Angeles in 2015, and the next Winter
> > games are in Graz in 2017.
> >
> > Could be good to increase coverage of this one area which I have
> > noticed seriously does suffer from systematic bias on our projects.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Russavia
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Files_from_Korea.net_Flickr_stream
> > [2]
> >
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:2013_Special_Olympics_World_Winter_Games
> > [3]
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Special_Olympics_World_Winter_Games
> > [4]
> >
> https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013%E5%B9%B4%E4%B8%96%E7%95%8C%E5%86%AC%E5%AD%A3%E7%89%B9%E6%AE%8A%E5%A5%A7%E6%9E%97%E5%8C%B9%E5%85%8B%E9%81%8B%E5%8B%95%E6%9C%83
> > [5]
> >
> https://tools.wmflabs.org/glamtools/glamorous.php?doit=1&category=2013+Special+Olympics+World+Winter+Games&use_globalusage=1&ns0=1&show_details=1&projects[wikipedia]=1&projects[wikimedia]=1&projects[wikisource]=1&projects[wikibooks]=1&projects[wikiquote]=1&projects[wiktionary]=1&projects[wikinews]=1&projects[wikivoyage]=1&projects[wikispecies]=1&projects[mediawiki]=1&projects[wikidata]=1&projects[wikiversity]=1
> > [6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Olympics_World_Games
> > [7]
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Special_Olympics_World_Summer_Games_Opening_Ceremony_and_Parade_of_Athletes,_with_NBA_legend_Yao_Ming.jpg
> > [8] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Special_Olympics
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimed

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia DC Q2 2013-14 Activity Report

2014-06-08 Thread Kirill Lokshin 
Hello everyone,

Wikimedia DC has now published its activity report for the second quarter
of the 2013-14 fiscal year.  The report is available on our wiki at
http://wikimediadc.org/wiki/Activity_report_(Q2_2013–2014).

As always, comments or suggestions are very welcome!

Cheers,
Kirill

--
Kirill Lokshin
Secretary
Wikimedia District of Columbia
http://wikimediadc.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons and OCILLA

2014-06-08 Thread Simon Knight 
Ah, my apologies! Should have given a closer reading
S

-Original Message-
From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org 
[mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of rupert THURNER
Sent: 08 June 2014 18:13
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons and OCILLA

Simon, this answers a different question. from wikimedia foundation standpoint, 
domain in its posession, domain registered in the u.s.
Am 08.06.2014 18:29 schrieb "Simon Knight" :

> See
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Legal_and_Community_Advocacy/Wikimedia
> _Server_Location_and_Free_Knowledge
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:
> wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of rupert THURNER
> Sent: 08 June 2014 17:27
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons and OCILLA
>
> Would it make sense to deploy a server in another country under a 
> domain not owned by the foundation? E.g. Switzerland?
>
> Rupert
>  Am 08.06.2014 14:10 schrieb "Jeevan Jose" :
>
> > BTW, why we have separate policies for Commons and Wikipedia? I just 
> > noticed that photographs deleted from Common per "not free in source 
> > country" are restored by our own (Commons) admins in English Wikipedia.
> >
> >
> > Jee
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 5:18 PM, geni  wrote:
> >
> > > On 8 June 2014 12:21, matanya  wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > Commons licensing policy determines media should be free in 
> > > > source country and in US. I want to propose We change the policy to be:
> > > > "free in source country" only, and to cope with US laws where 
> > > > the servers are hosted found a "DMCA take down notice" Team in 
> > > > OTRS, that will handle requests to remove Items that are 
> > > > non-free in the US after verifying proper grounds for the claim.
> > > >
> > > > This approach to copyright will prevent issues like URAA issues,
> > shorter
> > > > term issues and restored copyright issues.
> > > >
> > >
> > > No it it won't. UK restored a bunch of copyrights when EU went
> > > life+70
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > It will enrich commons with many files that are FREE (mostly PD) 
> > > > in source country, but not on commons due to US laws. Unless the 
> > > > copyright holder (mostly Gov's and archives) will not request 
> > > > removal, and they won't since they released the media, we will 
> > > > be
> using those files.
> > > >
> > >
> > > If the government held the copyright then you contact them and ask 
> > > them about their position on potential overseas copyrights.
> > >
> > >
> > > > I'm not a lawyer, so I probably missed most of the legal 
> > > > implication, But I do volunteer to found and lead the team, if 
> > > > this idea is accepted and commons community would want this 
> > > > policy change. I'm seeking input from copyright experienced 
> > > > users and lawyers, before i start an
> > official
> > > > policy change on commons.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The main problem that you hit is that  "free in source  country 
> > > and in
> > US"
> > > is a pretty good proxy for "free pretty much anywhere" (well 
> > > unless the source country is the US but that's a separate 
> > > problem). For example depending on how you read Saudi law there 
> > > are a bunch of photos that are free in Saudi Arabia and pretty 
> > > much nowhere else (Switzerland perhaps)
> > but
> > > unless our resuser know their way around over 100 copyright 
> > > systems they probably aren't going to know that. Thus from a reuse 
> > > POV commons goes
> > from
> > > being useful (as long as you allow for US weirdness) to being 
> > > (from a copyright perspective) a radioactive mess.
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe:
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > >  > > e>
> > >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: 
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https:/

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons and OCILLA

2014-06-08 Thread rupert THURNER 
Simon, this answers a different question. from wikimedia foundation
standpoint, domain in its posession, domain registered in the u.s.
Am 08.06.2014 18:29 schrieb "Simon Knight" :

> See
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Legal_and_Community_Advocacy/Wikimedia_Server_Location_and_Free_Knowledge
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:
> wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of rupert THURNER
> Sent: 08 June 2014 17:27
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons and OCILLA
>
> Would it make sense to deploy a server in another country under a domain
> not owned by the foundation? E.g. Switzerland?
>
> Rupert
>  Am 08.06.2014 14:10 schrieb "Jeevan Jose" :
>
> > BTW, why we have separate policies for Commons and Wikipedia? I just
> > noticed that photographs deleted from Common per "not free in source
> > country" are restored by our own (Commons) admins in English Wikipedia.
> >
> >
> > Jee
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 5:18 PM, geni  wrote:
> >
> > > On 8 June 2014 12:21, matanya  wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > Commons licensing policy determines media should be free in source
> > > > country and in US. I want to propose We change the policy to be:
> > > > "free in source country" only, and to cope with US laws where the
> > > > servers are hosted found a "DMCA take down notice" Team in OTRS,
> > > > that will handle requests to remove Items that are non-free in the
> > > > US after verifying proper grounds for the claim.
> > > >
> > > > This approach to copyright will prevent issues like URAA issues,
> > shorter
> > > > term issues and restored copyright issues.
> > > >
> > >
> > > No it it won't. UK restored a bunch of copyrights when EU went
> > > life+70
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > It will enrich commons with many files that are FREE (mostly PD)
> > > > in source country, but not on commons due to US laws. Unless the
> > > > copyright holder (mostly Gov's and archives) will not request
> > > > removal, and they won't since they released the media, we will be
> using those files.
> > > >
> > >
> > > If the government held the copyright then you contact them and ask
> > > them about their position on potential overseas copyrights.
> > >
> > >
> > > > I'm not a lawyer, so I probably missed most of the legal
> > > > implication, But I do volunteer to found and lead the team, if
> > > > this idea is accepted and commons community would want this policy
> > > > change. I'm seeking input from copyright experienced users and
> > > > lawyers, before i start an
> > official
> > > > policy change on commons.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The main problem that you hit is that  "free in source  country and
> > > in
> > US"
> > > is a pretty good proxy for "free pretty much anywhere" (well unless
> > > the source country is the US but that's a separate problem). For
> > > example depending on how you read Saudi law there are a bunch of
> > > photos that are free in Saudi Arabia and pretty much nowhere else
> > > (Switzerland perhaps)
> > but
> > > unless our resuser know their way around over 100 copyright systems
> > > they probably aren't going to know that. Thus from a reuse POV
> > > commons goes
> > from
> > > being useful (as long as you allow for US weirdness) to being (from
> > > a copyright perspective) a radioactive mess.
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe:
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/list

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons and OCILLA

2014-06-08 Thread Yann Forget 
Hi,

2014-06-08 21:56 GMT+05:30 rupert THURNER :
> Would it make sense to deploy a server in another country under a domain
> not owned by the foundation? E.g. Switzerland?

I already started that in 2005. It is called Wikilivres: http://wikilivres.ca/
In 2010, I could not continue to manage it and pay for the bill, and I
looked for volunteers to take over.
To my surprise, I found nearly noone willing to do that.
Finally Ray accepted to take charge. I am quite sure, he would welcome
help to manage it.

Regards,

Yann

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons and OCILLA

2014-06-08 Thread Simon Knight 
See 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Legal_and_Community_Advocacy/Wikimedia_Server_Location_and_Free_Knowledge
 

-Original Message-
From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org 
[mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of rupert THURNER
Sent: 08 June 2014 17:27
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons and OCILLA

Would it make sense to deploy a server in another country under a domain not 
owned by the foundation? E.g. Switzerland?

Rupert
 Am 08.06.2014 14:10 schrieb "Jeevan Jose" :

> BTW, why we have separate policies for Commons and Wikipedia? I just 
> noticed that photographs deleted from Common per "not free in source 
> country" are restored by our own (Commons) admins in English Wikipedia.
>
>
> Jee
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 5:18 PM, geni  wrote:
>
> > On 8 June 2014 12:21, matanya  wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > Commons licensing policy determines media should be free in source 
> > > country and in US. I want to propose We change the policy to be: 
> > > "free in source country" only, and to cope with US laws where the 
> > > servers are hosted found a "DMCA take down notice" Team in OTRS, 
> > > that will handle requests to remove Items that are non-free in the 
> > > US after verifying proper grounds for the claim.
> > >
> > > This approach to copyright will prevent issues like URAA issues,
> shorter
> > > term issues and restored copyright issues.
> > >
> >
> > No it it won't. UK restored a bunch of copyrights when EU went 
> > life+70
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > It will enrich commons with many files that are FREE (mostly PD) 
> > > in source country, but not on commons due to US laws. Unless the 
> > > copyright holder (mostly Gov's and archives) will not request 
> > > removal, and they won't since they released the media, we will be using 
> > > those files.
> > >
> >
> > If the government held the copyright then you contact them and ask 
> > them about their position on potential overseas copyrights.
> >
> >
> > > I'm not a lawyer, so I probably missed most of the legal 
> > > implication, But I do volunteer to found and lead the team, if 
> > > this idea is accepted and commons community would want this policy 
> > > change. I'm seeking input from copyright experienced users and 
> > > lawyers, before i start an
> official
> > > policy change on commons.
> >
> >
> >
> > The main problem that you hit is that  "free in source  country and 
> > in
> US"
> > is a pretty good proxy for "free pretty much anywhere" (well unless 
> > the source country is the US but that's a separate problem). For 
> > example depending on how you read Saudi law there are a bunch of 
> > photos that are free in Saudi Arabia and pretty much nowhere else 
> > (Switzerland perhaps)
> but
> > unless our resuser know their way around over 100 copyright systems 
> > they probably aren't going to know that. Thus from a reuse POV 
> > commons goes
> from
> > being useful (as long as you allow for US weirdness) to being (from 
> > a copyright perspective) a radioactive mess.
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: 
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons and OCILLA

2014-06-08 Thread rupert THURNER 
Would it make sense to deploy a server in another country under a domain
not owned by the foundation? E.g. Switzerland?

Rupert
 Am 08.06.2014 14:10 schrieb "Jeevan Jose" :

> BTW, why we have separate policies for Commons and Wikipedia? I just
> noticed that photographs deleted from Common per "not free in source
> country" are restored by our own (Commons) admins in English Wikipedia.
>
>
> Jee
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 5:18 PM, geni  wrote:
>
> > On 8 June 2014 12:21, matanya  wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > Commons licensing policy determines media should be free in source
> > > country and in US. I want to propose We change the policy to be: "free
> > > in source country" only, and to cope with US laws where the servers are
> > > hosted found a "DMCA take down notice" Team in OTRS, that will handle
> > > requests to remove Items that are non-free in the US after verifying
> > > proper grounds for the claim.
> > >
> > > This approach to copyright will prevent issues like URAA issues,
> shorter
> > > term issues and restored copyright issues.
> > >
> >
> > No it it won't. UK restored a bunch of copyrights when EU went life+70
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > It will enrich commons with many files that are FREE (mostly PD) in
> > > source country, but not on commons due to US laws. Unless the copyright
> > > holder (mostly Gov's and archives) will not request removal, and they
> > > won't since they released the media, we will be using those files.
> > >
> >
> > If the government held the copyright then you contact them and ask them
> > about their position on potential overseas copyrights.
> >
> >
> > > I'm not a lawyer, so I probably missed most of the legal implication,
> > > But I do volunteer to found and lead the team, if this idea is accepted
> > > and commons community would want this policy change. I'm seeking input
> > > from copyright experienced users and lawyers, before i start an
> official
> > > policy change on commons.
> >
> >
> >
> > The main problem that you hit is that  "free in source  country and in
> US"
> > is a pretty good proxy for "free pretty much anywhere" (well unless the
> > source country is the US but that's a separate problem). For example
> > depending on how you read Saudi law there are a bunch of photos that are
> > free in Saudi Arabia and pretty much nowhere else (Switzerland perhaps)
> but
> > unless our resuser know their way around over 100 copyright systems they
> > probably aren't going to know that. Thus from a reuse POV commons goes
> from
> > being useful (as long as you allow for US weirdness) to being (from a
> > copyright perspective) a radioactive mess.
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons and OCILLA

2014-06-08 Thread Jeevan Jose 
BTW, why we have separate policies for Commons and Wikipedia? I just
noticed that photographs deleted from Common per "not free in source
country" are restored by our own (Commons) admins in English Wikipedia.


Jee


On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 5:18 PM, geni  wrote:

> On 8 June 2014 12:21, matanya  wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > Commons licensing policy determines media should be free in source
> > country and in US. I want to propose We change the policy to be: "free
> > in source country" only, and to cope with US laws where the servers are
> > hosted found a "DMCA take down notice" Team in OTRS, that will handle
> > requests to remove Items that are non-free in the US after verifying
> > proper grounds for the claim.
> >
> > This approach to copyright will prevent issues like URAA issues, shorter
> > term issues and restored copyright issues.
> >
>
> No it it won't. UK restored a bunch of copyrights when EU went life+70
>
>
>
> >
> > It will enrich commons with many files that are FREE (mostly PD) in
> > source country, but not on commons due to US laws. Unless the copyright
> > holder (mostly Gov's and archives) will not request removal, and they
> > won't since they released the media, we will be using those files.
> >
>
> If the government held the copyright then you contact them and ask them
> about their position on potential overseas copyrights.
>
>
> > I'm not a lawyer, so I probably missed most of the legal implication,
> > But I do volunteer to found and lead the team, if this idea is accepted
> > and commons community would want this policy change. I'm seeking input
> > from copyright experienced users and lawyers, before i start an official
> > policy change on commons.
>
>
>
> The main problem that you hit is that  "free in source  country and in US"
> is a pretty good proxy for "free pretty much anywhere" (well unless the
> source country is the US but that's a separate problem). For example
> depending on how you read Saudi law there are a bunch of photos that are
> free in Saudi Arabia and pretty much nowhere else (Switzerland perhaps) but
> unless our resuser know their way around over 100 copyright systems they
> probably aren't going to know that. Thus from a reuse POV commons goes from
> being useful (as long as you allow for US weirdness) to being (from a
> copyright perspective) a radioactive mess.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons and OCILLA

2014-06-08 Thread geni 
On 8 June 2014 12:21, matanya  wrote:

>
>
> Hello,
>
> Commons licensing policy determines media should be free in source
> country and in US. I want to propose We change the policy to be: "free
> in source country" only, and to cope with US laws where the servers are
> hosted found a "DMCA take down notice" Team in OTRS, that will handle
> requests to remove Items that are non-free in the US after verifying
> proper grounds for the claim.
>
> This approach to copyright will prevent issues like URAA issues, shorter
> term issues and restored copyright issues.
>

No it it won't. UK restored a bunch of copyrights when EU went life+70



>
> It will enrich commons with many files that are FREE (mostly PD) in
> source country, but not on commons due to US laws. Unless the copyright
> holder (mostly Gov's and archives) will not request removal, and they
> won't since they released the media, we will be using those files.
>

If the government held the copyright then you contact them and ask them
about their position on potential overseas copyrights.


> I'm not a lawyer, so I probably missed most of the legal implication,
> But I do volunteer to found and lead the team, if this idea is accepted
> and commons community would want this policy change. I'm seeking input
> from copyright experienced users and lawyers, before i start an official
> policy change on commons.



The main problem that you hit is that  "free in source  country and in US"
is a pretty good proxy for "free pretty much anywhere" (well unless the
source country is the US but that's a separate problem). For example
depending on how you read Saudi law there are a bunch of photos that are
free in Saudi Arabia and pretty much nowhere else (Switzerland perhaps) but
unless our resuser know their way around over 100 copyright systems they
probably aren't going to know that. Thus from a reuse POV commons goes from
being useful (as long as you allow for US weirdness) to being (from a
copyright perspective) a radioactive mess.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons and OCILLA

2014-06-08 Thread Fæ 
On 8 June 2014 12:21, matanya  wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Commons licensing policy determines media should be free in source
> country and in US. I want to propose We change the policy to be: "free
> in source country" only, and to cope with US laws where the servers are
> hosted found a "DMCA take down notice" Team in OTRS, that will handle
> requests to remove Items that are non-free in the US after verifying
> proper grounds for the claim.
>
> This approach to copyright will prevent issues like URAA issues, shorter
> term issues and restored copyright issues.
>
> It will enrich commons with many files that are FREE (mostly PD) in
> source country, but not on commons due to US laws. Unless the copyright
> holder (mostly Gov's and archives) will not request removal, and they
> won't since they released the media, we will be using those files.
>
> I'm not a lawyer, so I probably missed most of the legal implication,
> But I do volunteer to found and lead the team, if this idea is accepted
> and commons community would want this policy change. I'm seeking input
> from copyright experienced users and lawyers, before i start an official
> policy change on commons.
>
> Thanks
>
> Matanya Moses

Hi Matanya,

From your history on Commons, I am sure you know as well as I, where
to make a proposal on the project and that this list is not a good
place to start an educational/lobbying campaign.

Michael Maggs' proposal in this area seems to have got stuck in
quicksand and dried up. To be honest, as an experienced Commons
contributor, I would tend to avoid helping with yet another URAA based
proposal/bun fight, unless there was a groundswell of opinion in
favour of change; it just is not a good investment of volunteer time.
Despite your recent comments on Commons, I don't see it happening.

In the long term, if you want to shift this reluctant elephant, I
suggest you concentrate on specific project areas (like early Japanese
public domain film posters...) and build those up into an excellent
case book. Nobody has even tried building their case book up using the
differing PD licence interpretation on the English Wikipedia yet. This
at least would have the advantage that anyone could see exciting
educational images that were not on Commons but could see (and use)
images on Wikipedia, and this might motivate them to review and have
an opinion on this contentious area of how we interpret and apply
international copyright law.

Please remember that 95%+ of Commons contributors are not going to
bother even attempting to understand the URAA, DMCA etc. Keeping it
simple and easy to understand in a multilingual environment is
essential.

Fae
-- 
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons and OCILLA

2014-06-08 Thread Simon Knight 
Hi Matanya
I'm sure there are others with more expertise than me on this list but a) isn't 
Commons the place to start this process, and b) have you looked at Michael 
Maggs' proposal (see email copied below from April) to relax the scope of the 
precautionary principle? That, and the discussion there, might be a good start.

Best
Simon

-Original Message-
From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org 
[mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Michael Maggs
Sent: 09 April 2014 18:44
To: UK Wikimedia mailing list; Wikimedia Mailing List; 
common...@lists.wikimedia.org; chapt...@wikimedia.ch
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] New Commons RFC on changing the Precautionary principle 
to tackle the URAA problem

I have made a proposal to relax the scope of the Commons so-called 
Precautionary principle to allow the site to host more of the locally public 
domain files that are being deleted because of the US URAA law, and also to 
keep more photos that have freedom of panorama in their home country but which 
might (or might not) be copyright-protected in the US.

This proposal comes out of an extremely long and complicated argument about 
copyright, which you don't necessarily need to get into, but it is an attempt 
to allow Commons to host more media files while at the same time ensuring that 
the site remains fully legal under US law.  We can legally take a much more 
nuanced position than 'Definitely Free' or 'Definitely Unfree', which is pretty 
much what we do at present.

Some editors have suggested ignoring US law, which the WMF simply cannot allow 
to happen, and this is an attempt to allow us to keep more non-US Public Domain 
material while still remaining on the right side of US law.

Put simply, do you agree that Commons should aim to host more files that are 
public domain in their home country even if they *might* still be 
copyright-protected in the US?

Please contribute here:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Review_of_Precautionary_principle

Michael
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 




-Original Message-
From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org 
[mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of matanya
Sent: 08 June 2014 12:21
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Commons and OCILLA

 

Hello, 

Commons licensing policy determines media should be free in source country and 
in US. I want to propose We change the policy to be: "free in source country" 
only, and to cope with US laws where the servers are hosted found a "DMCA take 
down notice" Team in OTRS, that will handle requests to remove Items that are 
non-free in the US after verifying proper grounds for the claim. 

This approach to copyright will prevent issues like URAA issues, shorter term 
issues and restored copyright issues. 

It will enrich commons with many files that are FREE (mostly PD) in source 
country, but not on commons due to US laws. Unless the copyright holder (mostly 
Gov's and archives) will not request removal, and they won't since they 
released the media, we will be using those files. 

I'm not a lawyer, so I probably missed most of the legal implication, But I do 
volunteer to found and lead the team, if this idea is accepted and commons 
community would want this policy change. I'm seeking input from copyright 
experienced users and lawyers, before i start an official policy change on 
commons. 

Thanks 

Matanya Moses 

 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

[Wikimedia-l] Commons and OCILLA

2014-06-08 Thread matanya 
 

Hello, 

Commons licensing policy determines media should be free in source
country and in US. I want to propose We change the policy to be: "free
in source country" only, and to cope with US laws where the servers are
hosted found a "DMCA take down notice" Team in OTRS, that will handle
requests to remove Items that are non-free in the US after verifying
proper grounds for the claim. 

This approach to copyright will prevent issues like URAA issues, shorter
term issues and restored copyright issues. 

It will enrich commons with many files that are FREE (mostly PD) in
source country, but not on commons due to US laws. Unless the copyright
holder (mostly Gov's and archives) will not request removal, and they
won't since they released the media, we will be using those files. 

I'm not a lawyer, so I probably missed most of the legal implication,
But I do volunteer to found and lead the team, if this idea is accepted
and commons community would want this policy change. I'm seeking input
from copyright experienced users and lawyers, before i start an official
policy change on commons. 

Thanks 

Matanya Moses 

 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiconference USA in the media

2014-06-08 Thread Martin Rulsch 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-06-04/Op-ed

Martin

2014-06-08 12:35 GMT+02:00 edward :

>
> On 08/06/2014 11:28, Chris Keating wrote:
>
>> It's interesting how much this thread reinforces what Sumana said in her
>> keynote at the conference!
>>
>> Chris
>>
>>
> What did Sumana say in her keynote at the conference?
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiconference USA in the media

2014-06-08 Thread edward 


On 08/06/2014 11:28, Chris Keating wrote:

It's interesting how much this thread reinforces what Sumana said in her
keynote at the conference!

Chris



What did Sumana say in her keynote at the conference?

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiconference USA in the media

2014-06-08 Thread Chris Keating 
It's interesting how much this thread reinforces what Sumana said in her
keynote at the conference!

Chris
On 8 Jun 2014 08:15, "Craig Franklin"  wrote:

> As someone who usually wears a suit and tie to Wikimedia events when I go
> (Hong Kong last year was the exception to that for the most part, way too
> humid), my advice to people would be to wear whatever the hell you feel
> comfortable in, subject to the normal standards of decency and the local
> climate.  If you feel comfortable in a hoodie, then wear one.  If you feel
> comfortable in a tie and monocle, then go right ahead.  Picking on people
> for their choice of clothes at a conference seems awfully petty to me.
>  Ultimately, you'll contribute more and be able to absorb more from others
> if you're not worrying about how tight your tie is or fretting over whether
> you'll be asked to leave for violating a dress code.
>
> Cheers,
> Craig "That Guy In A Suit" Franklin
>
>
> On 8 June 2014 15:50, Peter Southwood 
> wrote:
>
> > And I associate hoodies with people wanting to keep their heads warm.
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:
> > wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of edward
> > Sent: 07 June 2014 04:37 PM
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiconference USA in the media
> >
> > On 07/06/2014 15:18, Fæ wrote:
> > > So good luck to pizza stained t-shirts, wear them with pride.
> >
> > See my previous post. I thought the point was not that they had pizza
> > stained t-shirts, but rather that the Wikipedian who was interviewed
> > (Kevin) was explicitly dividing his kin into those who wear such stained
> > shorts, and those who dress in a 'chill' way, which as Mr McBride
> explains,
> > means 'cool and hip'.
> >
> >  >>these [i.e.  volunteers wearing hoodies] are the people most likely to
> > make a meaningful difference to open knowledge within the Wikimedia
> > movement.
> >
> > I don't see what the 'hoodie' bit has to do with it.  I associate
> > 'hoodies' with people who want to remain anonymous, possibly to escape
> the
> > attention of police, government agents or other responsible members of
> the
> > enforcement community charged with keeping the world safe from terrorism
> or
> > violence. Why would such people make a meaningful difference to open
> > knowledge within the Wikimedia movement?
> >
> > I'm puzzled.
> >
> > , E
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> > -
> > No virus found in this message.
> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > Version: 2014.0.4592 / Virus Database: 3955/7638 - Release Date: 06/07/14
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] The Signpost -- Volume 10, Issue 21 -- 04 June 2014

2014-06-08 Thread Wikipedia Signpost 
Special report: IEG funding for women's stories: a new approach to the gender 
gap
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-06-04/Special_report

Op-ed: "Hospitality, jerks, and what I learned"—the amazing keynote at 
WikiConference USA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-06-04/Op-ed

News and notes: Two new affiliate-selected trustees
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-06-04/News_and_notes

In the media: Reliable or not, doctors use Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-06-04/In_the_media

Traffic report: Autumn in summer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-06-04/Traffic_report

Featured content: Ye stately homes of England
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-06-04/Featured_content


Single page view
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signpost/Single

PDF version
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-06-04


https://www.facebook.com/wikisignpost / https://twitter.com/wikisignpost
--
Wikipedia Signpost Staff
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost

___
Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed 
to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. For more 
information about Wikimedia-l:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
___
WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiconference USA in the media

2014-06-08 Thread Craig Franklin 
As someone who usually wears a suit and tie to Wikimedia events when I go
(Hong Kong last year was the exception to that for the most part, way too
humid), my advice to people would be to wear whatever the hell you feel
comfortable in, subject to the normal standards of decency and the local
climate.  If you feel comfortable in a hoodie, then wear one.  If you feel
comfortable in a tie and monocle, then go right ahead.  Picking on people
for their choice of clothes at a conference seems awfully petty to me.
 Ultimately, you'll contribute more and be able to absorb more from others
if you're not worrying about how tight your tie is or fretting over whether
you'll be asked to leave for violating a dress code.

Cheers,
Craig "That Guy In A Suit" Franklin


On 8 June 2014 15:50, Peter Southwood  wrote:

> And I associate hoodies with people wanting to keep their heads warm.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:
> wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of edward
> Sent: 07 June 2014 04:37 PM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiconference USA in the media
>
> On 07/06/2014 15:18, Fæ wrote:
> > So good luck to pizza stained t-shirts, wear them with pride.
>
> See my previous post. I thought the point was not that they had pizza
> stained t-shirts, but rather that the Wikipedian who was interviewed
> (Kevin) was explicitly dividing his kin into those who wear such stained
> shorts, and those who dress in a 'chill' way, which as Mr McBride explains,
> means 'cool and hip'.
>
>  >>these [i.e.  volunteers wearing hoodies] are the people most likely to
> make a meaningful difference to open knowledge within the Wikimedia
> movement.
>
> I don't see what the 'hoodie' bit has to do with it.  I associate
> 'hoodies' with people who want to remain anonymous, possibly to escape the
> attention of police, government agents or other responsible members of the
> enforcement community charged with keeping the world safe from terrorism or
> violence. Why would such people make a meaningful difference to open
> knowledge within the Wikimedia movement?
>
> I'm puzzled.
>
> , E
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
> -
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2014.0.4592 / Virus Database: 3955/7638 - Release Date: 06/07/14
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,