Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Massive Online Open Course about Wikipedia

Hello, Congratulations for this project! I have looked at some figures, and some videos, and it looks very impressive. I'm gonna have a closer look in the nearby future. It would be great to have something like that in other languages. Kind regards Ziko 2016-04-05 19:25 GMT+02:00 Brill Lyle

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Fwd: Hello Mr. ccc, Now you can have your own Wikipedia page

On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Cristian Consonni wrote: > 2016-04-06 22:06 GMT+02:00 Florence Devouard : > > A relationship of mine received the email below and forwarded it to me. > > http://yourprmanager.com/ > > This is appalling. ​Heh.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Fwd: Hello Mr. ccc, Now you can have your own Wikipedia page

2016-04-06 22:06 GMT+02:00 Florence Devouard : > A relationship of mine received the email below and forwarded it to me. > http://yourprmanager.com/ This is appalling. C ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Fwd: Hello Mr. ccc, Now you can have your own Wikipedia page

Oh dear, those pesky spam laws... On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 10:06 PM, Florence Devouard wrote: > A relationship of mine received the email below and forwarded it to me. > http://yourprmanager.com/ > > This company is known ? > > Flo > > > = > > Début du message

[Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Fwd: Hello Mr. ccc, Now you can have your own Wikipedia page

A relationship of mine received the email below and forwarded it to me. http://yourprmanager.com/ This company is known ? Flo = Début du message réexpédié : De: Britney Davis Objet: Hello Mr. ccc, Now you can have your own Wikipedia page Date: 6

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Sweden loses copyright suit

2016-04-06 18:05 GMT+02:00 Castelo Branco : >> The decision specifically and repeatedly states that the commercial >> aspect is irrelevant, as such a database "typically has a not >> insignificant commercial value" – whether the images in this >> particular case are

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Sweden loses copyright suit

> The decision specifically and repeatedly states that the commercial > aspect is irrelevant, as such a database "typically has a not > insignificant commercial value" – whether the images in this > particular case are or can be used commercially or not. See paragraphs > 21 and 23. > > //Johan

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Sweden loses copyright suit

The blog still uses a whited out example of an 1854 statue, yet the discussion is supposedly about the sculptor's copyright. Is the Swedish court trying to imply that artists and their heirs have a near indefinite copyright period for sculpture on display in Sweden? Or is this a modern statue

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Sweden loses copyright suit

2016-04-06 0:57 GMT+02:00 Lilburne : > You still haven't got it right. What you can't do is publish a database of > images for commercial use. > > If I were to go to Sweden take photos of every publicly placed work of art > and put them on a website > there wouldn't