Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who will host Wikimedia Conference 2014? Bidding process is open!

2013-09-17 Thread Itzik Edri
I singed up. I'll be happy to help with the Location committee. On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 10:41 PM, Asaf Bartov abar...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 12:31 PM, Balázs Viczián balazs.vicz...@wikimedia.hu wrote: would be nice to learn more about the programme committee; who

Re: [Wikimedia-l] : WMF resolution on neutral point of view

2013-09-17 Thread Katie Chan
On 17/09/2013 03:33, Risker wrote: I am not certain that neutral point of view applies to all Wikimedia projects. Wikiversity programs may deliberately examine one aspect of a subject while ignoring others, for example. It is difficult to apply the concept of neutrality to images and other

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who will host Wikimedia Conference 2014? Bidding process is open!

2013-09-17 Thread Nicole Ebber
Thanks, Itzik! :) On 17 September 2013 09:38, Itzik Edri it...@infra.co.il wrote: I singed up. I'll be happy to help with the Location committee. On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 10:41 PM, Asaf Bartov abar...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 12:31 PM, Balázs Viczián

Re: [Wikimedia-l] : WMF resolution on neutral point of view

2013-09-17 Thread Federico Leva (Nemo)
Katie Chan, 17/09/2013 11:57: – have a strict *neutral point of view* (NPOV) policy. -- https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Neutral_point_of_view And if you look at the history you'll see that the but not part is disputed. As for me, I've spent a few years debunking the myth that NPOV

Re: [Wikimedia-l] : WMF resolution on neutral point of view

2013-09-17 Thread とある白い猫
I know that, you know that, people participating in this thread knows that, but for all practical purposes that's a forgotten random pre-WMF edit. I am not questioning the importance of Neutral Point of View, one of our core values. While larger wikis have this value enshrined and well enforced,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] : WMF resolution on neutral point of view

2013-09-17 Thread とある白い猫
For data oriented projects such as Wikidata, Wikisource, Commons I think NPOV still applies as we shouldn't censor data just because our POV has issues with it. Consider this in the context of - Mohammed image controversy for Commons (how they aren't deleted) - Bible versions for

[Wikimedia-l] Watching a catageory

2013-09-17 Thread Andy Mabbett
If I watch a category in Wikipedia or anther project, I'm notified when the category page changes, but not when an item is added to or removed from a category. Is there a tool which performs this function? -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Radiological images

2013-09-17 Thread Tomasz Ganicz
Just joking: ask Jimbo to contact your Queen - I heard he has good relationship with Her Majesty :-) 2013/9/17 James Heilman jmh...@gmail.com: My concern is that if we are going to be both super cautious and assume that X-rays are copyrightable than we will need to get permission from all 9

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Watching a catageory

2013-09-17 Thread Petr Kadlec
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.ukwrote: If I watch a category in Wikipedia or anther project, I'm notified when the category page changes, but not when an item is added to or removed from a category. Is there a tool which performs this function? I know

Re: [Wikimedia-l] : WMF resolution on neutral point of view

2013-09-17 Thread Fred Bauder
I know that, you know that, people participating in this thread knows that, but for all practical purposes that's a forgotten random pre-WMF edit. I am not questioning the importance of Neutral Point of View, one of our core values. While larger wikis have this value enshrined and well

Re: [Wikimedia-l] : WMF resolution on neutral point of view

2013-09-17 Thread Fred Bauder
I am not disputing how settled it is but I don't think meta sufficiently achieves expressing how settled this core value really is. As you stated it would be more of a restatement and re-emphasis of what already is a core value. -- とある白い猫 (To Aru Shiroi Neko) Yes, good idea,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] : WMF resolution on neutral point of view

2013-09-17 Thread Fred Bauder
I am not disputing how settled it is but I don't think meta sufficiently achieves expressing how settled this core value really is. As you stated it would be more of a restatement and re-emphasis of what already is a core value. -- とある白い猫 (To Aru Shiroi

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Watching a catageory

2013-09-17 Thread Andy Mabbett
On 17 September 2013 12:49, Petr Kadlec petr.kad...@gmail.com wrote: If I watch a category in Wikipedia or anther project, I'm notified when the category page changes, but not when an item is added to or removed from a category. Is there a tool which performs this function? I know only

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who will host Wikimedia Conference 2014? Bidding process is open!

2013-09-17 Thread Nicole Ebber
Hi Balázs, thanks for asking. I wanted to focus on the location committee first, and then send a call for input and volunteers for the programme committee within the next days. Best, Nicole On 16 September 2013 21:31, Balázs Viczián balazs.vicz...@wikimedia.hu wrote: would be nice to learn

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Radiological images

2013-09-17 Thread Nathan
Maybe they don't own the images outright from a legal perspective, but certainly ethics (and particularly medical ethics) is moving in the direction of securing permission from the subject of the images before they are used for purposes other than treatment. Documenting this kind of permission in

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Radiological images

2013-09-17 Thread Mathias Schindler
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: Maybe they don't own the images outright from a legal perspective, but certainly ethics (and particularly medical ethics) They do not own it from a copyright perspective. I did not speak about other applicable laws protecting

[Wikimedia-l] Radiological images

2013-09-17 Thread James Heilman
Yes that could be resolved with a policy of only using images published by an organization known to pursue permission where feasible sounds like the type of policy nupedia needs. The problems is nupedia went defunct in 2003. This sounds just like a policy an encyclopedia anyone can edit does not

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Radiological images

2013-09-17 Thread Petr Kadlec
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 4:02 AM, Asaf Bartov abar...@wikimedia.org wrote: IANAL, but my interpretation would be that X-rays are not copyrightable, since they are not creative works, period. Note that e.g. in the Czech Republic, “[a] photograph or a work produced by a process similar to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Radiological images

2013-09-17 Thread Risker
In many jurisdictions, there are specific privacy laws that address the rights of patients to control access to *any* information about them, whether identifying or not, and requirements that any use of patient information, whether anonymized or not, must be done with the consent of the patient

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Radiological images

2013-09-17 Thread Erlend Bjørtvedt
I took CR scanning recently, and reflected on who would be the right copyrightholder. The manufacturer of the machine (Siemens) - certainly not, that would be like Nikon and Canon holding rights to all photos on Commons... The hospital - certainly not, since there ar eindividuals running the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Radiological images

2013-09-17 Thread Katie Chan
On 17/09/2013 17:47, Erlend Bjørtvedt wrote: I took CR scanning recently, and reflected on who would be the right copyrightholder. The manufacturer of the machine (Siemens) - certainly not, that would be like Nikon and Canon holding rights to all photos on Commons... The hospital - certainly

[Wikimedia-l] FDC staff IRC office hours this week

2013-09-17 Thread Katy Love
Hi everyone, I wanted to remind folks about the two upcoming IRC office hours sessions that the FDC staff will be hosting in the coming days. We know many entities are in the midst of creating their proposals to the FDC, so we are hosting these sessions to answer questions about the annual plan

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Radiological images

2013-09-17 Thread Erlend Bjørtvedt
When we speak of CT or MR, the machine is in both cases operated by (at least) two persons. It seems that they perform different tasks (the machines are big and complex). It also seems that the operation of both persons is necessary for the images to be taken. Quite apart from the question of who

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Radiological images

2013-09-17 Thread Joseph Chirum
furthermore , when radiological images are concerned, they are protected from distribution by HIPPA privacy regulations and laws.  Also leaning in the favor of the patient as far as rights go concerning images. From: Katie Chan k...@ktchan.info To:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Radiological images

2013-09-17 Thread Joseph Chirum
In my opinion, the patient is the copyright holder.  for these reasons mentioned by Erlend.  The hospital is an institution, and the photographer is an employee.  Therefore the patient is the consumer, and thus the patron, in turn forming an agreement as to the subject matter, and thus the

[Wikimedia-l] Radiological images

2013-09-17 Thread Joseph Chirum
credits on the work should also be added to the machine operator, as they would be akin to the photographer.  However they are simply contracted, and not the independent conceptualizer of the work, in its final output.  There may be observers present, and the observer always affects the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Radiological images

2013-09-17 Thread Joseph Chirum
The purpose of radiological images is not to make money in the market, nor to benefit in the arena of copyright holdings, but rather to provide knowledge which is of benefit to specialists and researchers in the field. From: Erlend Bjørtvedt

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Radiological images

2013-09-17 Thread Nathan
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 4:48 PM, Joseph Chirum sundog...@yahoo.com wrote: If it were Art, the copyright would be clearly defined. If it is technical craft in the medical field, such images fall unto another category all together. Any display of such images would need the patient consent to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Radiological images

2013-09-17 Thread Joseph Chirum
If it were Art, the copyright would be clearly defined.  If it is technical craft in the medical field, such images fall unto another category all together.  Any display of such images would need the patient consent to be HIPPA compliant, or other agreement binding.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Radiological images

2013-09-17 Thread Nathan
I think the question of who owns the copyright is just plain unsettled law. Debating it here isn't going to resolve an issue that is, in the legal realm, unresolved. My own guess is that the organization employing the people performing the imaging likely owns the copyright barring agreements

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Radiological images

2013-09-17 Thread Joseph Chirum
Perhaps if all parties are in agreement, the image can be entered into the Public Domain.  The goal of this would be to aid researchers and scientists.  The images cannot be stuck in limbo forever, so by setting them into the public domain, they become non-copyrightable if HIPPA is exempt,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Radiological images

2013-09-17 Thread Andrew Gray
As often, I agree entirely with Risker - ethics and privacy are as big an issue here as copyright and we need to be able to give a clear declaration that both aspects are okay. That said, I think Nathan has spotted a way forward - OA journals might be the way to square this circle. Three points:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Radiological images

2013-09-17 Thread Andrew Gray
It was certainly my understanding that most major medical journals have much better ethical clearance for publication of patient images than they did ten or twenty years ago. This isn't my field, so quite likely I've got the wrong end of the stick, but is it that only a few journals are

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Radiological images

2013-09-17 Thread James Heilman
So with issues around subject consent does this mean all images of people ( including those of their genitals ) should be removed from commons unless they have been previously published in a high quality open source journal? OTRS is really not sufficient if we are going to require a proper consent

[Wikimedia-l] Fwd: German University of Tubingen partners with Malayalam Wikimedians to digitize the works of Herman Gundert.

2013-09-17 Thread CherianTinu Abraham
Hi all, Some of you would have already heard about the recent partnership between Malayalam Wikimedians German University of Tubingen to digitize the works of Herman Gundert. Dr. Hermann Gundert was a German missionary, scholar, and linguist, as well as the grandfather of German novelist

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Radiological images

2013-09-17 Thread Risker
On 17 September 2013 23:56, James Heilman jmh...@gmail.com wrote: To address the issue of needing patient consent for release of X-rays in publications the General Medical Council in the UK says ethically it is NOT required. 1. 10. Consent to make the recordings listed below will be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Radiological images

2013-09-17 Thread James Salsman
So, there has never been a copyright or privacy dispute involving any actual radiology image, nor has anyone been able to find any evidence of a hint of any such dispute. The law is silent on the question because there has never been such a dispute. Yet some people want to delete hundreds of such