Re: [Wikimedia-l] Study: Nobody cares about your copyright
On 21 May 2012 13:09, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: From Rick Falkvinge, an English-language writeup of a Swedish study: http://falkvinge.net/2012/05/21/study-despite-tougher-copyright-monopoly-laws-sharing-remains-pervasive/ http://svt.se/nyheter/fortsatt-fildelning-trots-skarpt-lag (Swedish news report) 61% of 15-25-year-olds in Sweden fileshare personally, and heavy sharers have gone up. Furthermore - industry copyright education campaigns create resentment, defiance and disrespect for the law in general. So, is the time ripe yet for us to start pushing for a 14-year term, or do we wait a bit? I suggest we start contemplating it, however. The most pirated bit of content at the moment appears to be game of thrones so I'm not sure what 14 years has to do with anything. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked principle of least surprise for the image filter?
On 13 June 2012 21:30, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: I was looking over old discussions, and wondered: who originally came up with the notion that the principle of least surprise should apply to educational content? If it existed before Wikimedia, who introduced it to the image filter discussion, on what rationale? It (principle of least astonishment) derives from our redirect guidelines where you are trying to decide between redirecting to an article and redirecting to a disambiguation page. It also somewhat related to page naming. [Personally I think it's an inanity - an education that doesn't turn your head upside down might as well be basket weaving - and it's too easily applied to shocking and outrageous concepts that children shouldn't be exposed to, like homosexuality or rights for minorities - but I could of course be convinced I'm wrong.] I think you miss the point of a concept. The idea is not that say [[Marriage]] shouldn't contain information about homosexual marriages, heterosexual marriages, marriages of convenience or polygamous marriages but that it probably shouldn't contain photos of marriage consummation. [[Nude photography]] on the other hand should have some nudity. but then it should also be more than 3 paragraphs long. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked principle of least surprise for the image filter?
On 14 June 2012 14:45, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: As I have noted already, this idealised version is not how it was used when it was introduced to the discussion and is not how it's been used in the most recent round of it. Looking at the timing of the phrase appeared in the email list I think you were physically present when the phrase stated being used in the context of dealing controversial content. Certainly I can find it being used in that context before that London meetup that Dory Carr-Harris attended. And in that case at least the meaning was very much in the direction of not including controversial content unless there was a valid reason to do so. It was unrelated to an image filter. Shocking images in [[Nanking Massacre]] are pretty much expected. [[People's Republic of China–Japan relations]] not so much. [[Agent orange]] is a more boarderline case but these things are never easy as [[Wikipedia:LAME#Names]] shows. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked principle of least surprise for the image filter?
On 14 June 2012 18:01, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, but this is called editorial judgement No its called censorship. Or at least it will be called censorship by enough people to make any debate not worth the effort. rather than something that can be imposed by filtering. True for wikipedia but commons in particular needs some way or another to provide more focused search results. (Although the board and staff claim that editorial judgement they disagree with must just be trolling is how principle of least surprise becomes we need a filter system.) Perhaps but I wasn't aware that their opinions were considered to be of any significance at this point. Okey they did block [[user:Beta_M]] but the fact that very much came out of the blue shows how little consideration they are given these days. The fact remains that anyone who actually wants a filter could probably put one together in the form of an Adblock plus filter list within a few days. So far the only list I'm aware of is one I put together to filter out images of Giant isopods. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked principle of least surprise for the image filter?
On 17 June 2012 14:14, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 17 June 2012 13:21, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote: No software is perfect. No solution is perfect. But don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. You're assuming that a good exists for this function. This assumption is entirely unsubstantiated. Well the various attempts by collages to block game sites were somewhat effective. And that did have the effect of freeing up more computers for actual college work. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] TVTropes deletes all pages with Rape in title under advertising pressure.
On 26 June 2012 19:02, Kim Bruning k...@bruning.xs4all.nl wrote: In the mean time, the discussed tropes *do* exist in our culture and in our movies. It somehow feels soviet. :-/ A significant chunk of them would probably fail [[WP:V]]. Actually for the most part I just feel sorry for the people who are meant to enforce the new rules. On the other hand I note that home made explosive tropes are not affected. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] TVTropes deletes all pages with Rape in title under advertising pressure.
On 27 June 2012 05:15, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: Perhaps so. :)) (But clearly, so have you.) The difference being that I've been following Wikipedia criticism for much longer to the point where I can just view it as a rather repetitive soap opera. I was actually thinking of the board, or just Jimbo himself, rather than any wider group of luminaries (or actual Wikipedia editors). If Google wanted something, I am sure they would speak in person to the people they have had personal contact with. The problem with your theory is that firstly it assumes a level of control that those people don't have and secondly that you are forgetting that Google is a PLC. So, seen from one perspective, all the value that volunteers had created in the English Wikipedia over a decade was leveraged to support one view on copyrights, which happened to coincide with Google's business interests. And Google happened to donate half a million to Wikipedia just around that time. That would be the conspiracy theorist perspective yes. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] O'Dwyer
On 27 June 2012 21:25, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: Let's just start with the notion that there might be more than just *one* view. ;) Why start there? Again I understand you haven't really studied copyright but quite a few wikipedians have. So everything from copyright maximalist anarco-capitalists to the usual annoying everything should be free crowd is well understood. And thats before we even begin to consider historic positions and those that involve technology that hasn't been invented yet. Useful article about the Internet's impact on musicians, in an independent UK music newspaper: http://www.thestoolpigeon.co.uk/features/interview-robert-levine-ben-watt-sopa-internet-piracy.html Not really. No new stats no worthwhile legal or technical analysis. ---o0o--- *How well drafted is SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) and what impact do you think it will have? * SOAP is dead. It is largely irrelevant at this point. Perhaps you couldn't find anyone talking about ACTA but that suggests a concerning lack of google skills. Incidentally the length of your quote is really pushing it a bit with regards to the UKs fair dealing provisions. But perhaps you are unconcerned with such matters. It's nice to see not everyone has drunk the Kool-Aid. Were you trying to say something here? -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] O'Dwyer
On 27 June 2012 22:05, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: attributed to the Wikipedia founder, then there really is no discernible difference between his view and Wikipedia's, or Google's. wikipedia doesn't really have views in the conventional sense. The amorphous blob that is the Wikipedia community does to an extent and it is well documented that they conflict with jimbo from time to time. Trying to line up wikipedia and google though is just more evidence you haven't been paying attention. Differing approaches to user privacy and PLC vs non profit being the most obvious differences. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] O'Dwyer
On 28 June 2012 01:37, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: Jay, what did Jimmy expect the press to report? None of you have been doing this since yesterday. Jimmy's very petition is signed Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia founder. http://www.change.org/petitions/ukhomeoffice-stop-the-extradition-of-richard-o-dwyer-to-the-usa-saverichard This is Wikipedia's name that is being leveraged here, pure and simply. And consciously so, deliberately, intentionally, knowingly. Yeah we get it you don't like Jimbo. Is there any reason we should care? -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mexican government signs ACTA
On 12 July 2012 17:31, Ivan Martínez gala...@gmail.com wrote: Dear all, The agency that regulates in Mexico the Industrial Property (IMPI) signed the ACTA agreement in Japan yesterday. Here's the official press release[1]. What exact issues is ACTA meant to cause us. Remember stronger copyright controls are in many ways in Wikipedia's interest. It kills off any potential competition. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Apparently, Wikipedia is ugly
On 15 July 2012 00:52, Michel Vuijlsteke wikipe...@zog.org wrote: Maybe if we used some of our millions to pay for a good designer? Won't work. Aside from the wikipedia forever mess that shows how things can go wrong the En main page is firmly under the control of the en.wikipedia community and it will change it when it is ready and not before. Try the ang.wikipedia.org instead. Common on the other hand is pretty much a lost cause pending a major rewrite of mediawiki to allow it to act as a more conventional form of image hosting software. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Apparently, Wikipedia is ugly
On 16 July 2012 02:51, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: Gee. I'd want a webpage that shows me hundreds of different ways Wikipedia can look – pink, green, yellow, pastel; serious, snazzy, fun or weird; sidebar left, right, top, or bottom – created by talented designers, where I can point and click to install the one I like in less than a minute. Something ... you know ... user-friendly, for non-programmers. You appear to be confused as to what open software is all about. In any case the need to fit around the stuff Wikipedians put in articles limits the amount of customisation that is possible in a practical skin. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] speedydeletion.wika.com lauched
On 21 July 2012 22:33, Mike Dupont jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote: John, and others. I have finally figured out a big problem with my plan. The articles for deletion are not tagged peoperly at all. There are authors who know for a fact that articles are mistagged and have no proper copyvio tagging, and now they are accusing me of hosting copyvio articles. I see this a problem in the wikipedia deletion system, if an editor knows for a fact that an articles is in violation of copyright then they should tag it as Such. I have written scripts to strip out artilces that are properly tagged. Lets sit down and work out a plan for a proper system of sorting out what is not notable, and waht is copyrightvio. Not going to happen. The reality is that people deleting articles are going to opt for the option that takes the least effort on their part. And A7 beats out G12 in that case. The other issue is that OTRS, who's opinions we care about a lot more, complain when people go the other way (deleting things as copyvios rather than going through AFD). -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright on Xrays
On 21 August 2012 19:44, birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote: Utilitarian work = uncopyrightable Only under a fairly limited number of legal systems. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright on Xrays
On 22 August 2012 14:14, birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote: On Aug 21, 2012, at 3:17 PM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:19 PM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: On 21 August 2012 19:44, birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote: Utilitarian work = uncopyrightable Only under a fairly limited number of legal systems. [[ciatation needed]] Short answer is that the term Utilitarian work doesn't appear in French, British or US copyright law and no one else had a worthwhile empire during the relevant time period. I really doubt non-artistic works are copyrighted as a general rule anywhere (. . . but I have been wrong before). Well EU database copyright would be an a counter example but thats rather an oddball area. In the case of the US we can consider the constitutional basis of copyright To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries. So there is no reason why a scientific work with no artistic element wouldn't be protected by copyright. Now clearly being able to judge that X is a utilitarian work is the more normal problem with this argument and why it is seldom used. No the argument isn't use because the term has no meaning. I think perhaps you are referring to the concept of useful article however I'm not aware of any photograph ever being considered a pure useful article. Diagnostic images are one of the few clear-cut situations. They aren't per Duchamp and the found art movement. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] : Copyright of deep space objects (DSOs) outside of the solar system
On 15 September 2012 07:24, とある白い猫 to.aru.shiroi.n...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I am not seeking legal advice. I am asking the pursuit of the issue. I am not a US citizen so I do not have a congress person to contact. The laws governing copyright can be amended to address the issue of deep space objects (DSO). I do not expect a result next week, I merely want the issue to enter into an agenda of some sort. If the Foundation is going to take the lead, this probably would only be possible through a board decision. In such a case I want to work with people to come up with such a draft proposal to the board. I realize this is an unusual request but there seems to be a lack of clarity on this issue[1]. Argument is that copyright can be an issue since not every organization observing or assisting NASA's observations are PD-USgov compatible. We may be forced to permanently delete all deep space objects as a result. I'd like to provide a short technical explanation why copyright of deep space objects or DSOs (objects outside of the solar system) are meaningless. For ordinary photographs copyright is determined by factors such as lighting, perspective, exposure and other such settings that creates a different image of the same object. You can distinguish the difference between a daylight photo and an evening photo. With deep space objects however, even the stellar parallax[2] has a very small value. The closest object outside of the solar system is 4.24 light years (268,136 AU's) away. The semi-major axis of earth is about 1AUs. The difference in perspective is like looking at a 2cm (width of a nickel) wide object 5.3km (3.29 miles) away and the perspective difference is switching left eye to the right eye. We lack scientific instruments to even detect a stellar parallax for objects much further. In other words our perspective of the nearest star and beyond is more or less constant and the objects themselves look the same for hundreds of years. So any photo of a deep space object I or someone else takes from the solar system will look identical regardless of when and where on earth I take it within multiple lifetimes. Not so. The results from the Atacama Desert are going to be far clearer than the results from say Snowdonia. That is before we consider the issues of different filters, exposure times and instruments. If you claim was true we could just team up with a couple of amateur observetories (one in each hemisphere) and retake all the deep sky images (which might not be an entirely bad thing anyway). -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] : Copyright of deep space objects (DSOs) outside of the solar system
On 17 September 2012 04:07, とある白い猫 to.aru.shiroi.n...@gmail.com wrote: Point is place and time does not matter as the object would look the same. A couple of amateur observatories would not be able to produce images that can rival Hubble which is in orbit. Do you see the problem? -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike
On 20 September 2012 04:56, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote: I have never understood anyone who thinks that showing contempt for the Prophet was a smart thing to do. Only great evil comes from it. Not great spiritual trouble or lightning bolts from God; I'm not superstitious, but simply a dirty mess that results in a great deal of damage to innocent people. That Muslims should grow up is a given, but so should everyone else. It is simply not possible for Russia to permit showing of such material nor for India, or possibly even France; it's inflammatory. Given what Russia has been up to in Chechnya and Ingushetia I'm not sure they are too worried about being inflammatory. Not publishing pictures of the Prophet and being reasonably respectful toward him is pretty much the first lesson anyone who hopes to have a decent relationship with Muslims is taught. Going out of your way to heap contempt on him is just stupid; unless making trouble is your purpose. We never did get to the bottom of the Russian apartment bombings. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation and Saudi Telecom (STC) partner to provide access to Wikipedia free of mobile data charges in the Middle East
On 14 October 2012 22:12, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: Will access to Wikipedia for people in Saudi Arabia be uncensored? Very unlikely. Has there been any agreement with Saudi Telecom on censorship? The Saudi's don't like to discuss their censorship policies with outsiders. I would assume that they take the view that it is something they can manage on their own. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Help needed to complete and expand the Wikimedia glossary
On 20 November 2012 18:55, Guillaume Paumier gpaum...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi, The use of jargon, acronyms and other abbreviations throughout the Wikimedia movement is a major source of communication issues, and barriers to comprehension and involvement. The recent thread on this list about What is Product? is an example of this, as are initialisms that have long been known to be a barrier for Wikipedia newcomers. A way to bridge people and communities with different vocabularies is to write and maintain a glossary that explains jargon in plain English terms. We've been lacking a good and up-to-date glossary for Wikimedia stuff (Foundation, chapter, movement, technology, etc.). Therefore, I've started to clean up and expand the outdated Glossary on meta, but it's a lot of work, and I don't have all the answers myself either. I'll continue to work on it, but I'd love to get some help on this and to make it a collaborative effort. If you have a few minutes to spare, please consider helping your (current and future) fellow Wikimedians by writing a few definitions if there are terms that you can explain in plain English. Additions of new terms are much welcome as well: Been done: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiSpeak -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Alpha version of the VisualEditor now available on the English Wikipedia
On 12 December 2012 20:29, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: Hoi, Terry with respect, an alpha release that is not even ready to be used in the scripts and languages of Wikipedia is not worthy of the designation alpha. Err do you know what alpha means in a software context? It has pointed out for more than a year that the internationalisation of the visual editor needs serious attention. The notion that internationalisation is an architecture is very much accepted wisdom. And we should care because? The reality is that en.wikipedia has some of the messiest markup going and its users speak the same language as the developers. If you want the thing to work at all its the only viable approach. When Gabriel indicates that the names of namespaces is a present problem, you ignore the real issues that are beyond this. It is not just a matter of translating messages, it starts before this; having messages that can be translated. This has been an issue that has been all too often ignored. If a language is unable to express a concept that exists in english its probably going to go extinct within a few decades and it would be generally unethical to interfere. I am looking forward to an alpha release worthy of the name where all our languages can be enabled for the use of the visual editor. Until this time it demonstrates the lack of importance given in the engeneering process to internationalisation. In other words you are saying that engineering ignores the attempted power grab by the language mob. Why is this meant to be a bad thing? -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] New proposal for a wiki Project!
On 18 February 2013 16:33, Kevin Behrens kevin_behr...@hotmail.de wrote: Hello! I have started a proposal for a new wiki project: WikiLang (meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiLang). It is about endangered languages and language documentation/decipherment. It is a very important step in order to save our linguistic diversity which is ongoing faster than the extinction of animals. Why? Most of the languages in question have so little information stored in them that even if we assume a total loss of that information (which is unlikely) that downside will be massively outweighed by the upside of easier communication between people. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Longest living hoax?
On 5 March 2013 16:42, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote: It's also telling that the longest hoax was about ancient history: it matches the popular belief that history is by far the biggest weakness of Wikipedia. Err thats not a popular belief. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] questions on the use of banner space to promote a cause
On 30 March 2013 20:57, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote: In today's Office Hour[1] I had some questions about the Promotional Use of Website Assets section of the Foundation Policy and Political Association Guideline[2] which I'm not sure were addressed in accordance with what that guideline actually says. And it was made clear that decisions about it have been made in one-on-one and small group discussions, instead of the wider consultations which the guideline contemplates. I've asked similar questions on the Advocacy Advisors list which weren't directly answered. So I want to ask some specific questions and a general question of the community at large: (A) Should the Foundation devote banner space on project home pages to CISPA advocacy?[3][4] (B) Should the Foundation devote banner space on project home pages to CALEA advocacy?[5] (C) Should the Foundation devote banner space on project home pages to CFAA advocacy?[6] No since none of those have any impact on our core issues. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Train Wikiexpedition in Poland
On 26 April 2013 18:05, Fae faewik+g...@gmail.com wrote: Polish Railways will provide us free tickets excellent negotiation! Hey, train enthusiasts everywhere else (including the UK and USA) here is an incredibly tough target for the rest of us to try and beat. :-D National Railway Museum in york is free. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] UK.Gov passes Instagram Act
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 would be useful for WMUK to ask a committee or whatever to assist the Secretary of State in the decision and to be appointed/heard in such committee. Usually they only listen to publishers and sometimes librarians. The reality is that the law is of no real interest to us since such works can't end up under a free license. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] UK.Gov passes Instagram Act
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 when it was first proposed? Seriously I've seen this topic floating around on various photography sites. Any idea who is behind the campaign and why? -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] UK.Gov passes Instagram Act
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 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 would be useful for WMUK to ask a committee or whatever to assist the Secretary of State in the decision and to be appointed/heard in such committee. Usually they only listen to publishers and sometimes librarians. The reality is that the law is of no real interest to us since such works can't end up under a free license. This is, of course, false. Ridiculous copyright lengths and permission culture in general are very much a problem for us, and something it's strongly in our interest to push back on in general. 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. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia in blacklist trouble again
On 8 May 2013 16:52, Tomasz W. Kozlowski tom...@twkozlowski.net wrote: Hi all, I think it should be noted that the Russian Wikipedia is having more and more problems with the state-maintained Internet blacklist (an idea that they heavily opposed, and which made them go on strike last July). They folded the first time. Were they foolish enough to think that there would not be a second? -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] If you are passionate about world hunger, sustainability and global issues please read this
On 18 June 2013 18:38, Alex Peek alexpe...@gmail.com wrote: I demand that my project gets global attention. Well you've got British and German I cannot emphasize how important this is. The current political leadership has shown incapable of addressing our current problems (environmental destruction world hunger, etc.). Given the current size of nuclear stockpiles I'd suggest it has. Change is needed. A new economic perspective is needed. Been tried. Didn't end well. I feel morally responsible to stand on top of a mountain and yell for attention. Would you like us to direct you to the nearest mountain? My intentions are altruistic. People are dying of starvation everyday and I will not shut up until they have food. You might want to study the issue a bit more closely before talking about it. For example people tend to be dying of malnutrition more than starvation per se I have listed below draft article that I have been working on. Please check them out. I'm not seeing what it adds to wikipedia or how it addresses the complex socio-political issues around modern food distribution. For example while the western world probably has the ability to end large scale malnutrition in north korea the deaths of 10 million or so people in Seoul during the opening stages of removing the kimn family from power make such actions undesirable. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Picturing Canada: historic Canadian photography now on Commons
On 1 July 2013 19:29, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk wrote: Hi all, Today, the British Library announced the Picturing Canada project to mark Canada Day (1st July). Those of you who were at GLAM-Wiki in April may remember this collection: it's a digitisation of the Canadian Copyright Collection, 1895-1924, covering photographs deposited for copyright registration in Canada during this period. There's currently about 2,000 photographs, many of which are composites of multiple images stuck together; all are available as full-resolution TIFFs and JPEGs. There's more files still trickling up - including some interesting aerial photographs, panoramas, and a collection of official photographs from WWI - but almost all of the general images are now online, and we're now just adding the oddities. Including the official photographs, this will total around 4,000 works. Please do take a look - there's some marvellous material in there. WMF: http://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/07/01/picturing-canada/ (in English and French; translation by Benoit Rochon) BL: http://britishlibrary.typepad.co.uk/americas/2013/07/happy-canada-day.html Commons: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Picturing_Canada Thanks to Wikimedia UK and the Eccles Centre for American Studies for funding this, and to Phil Hatfield at the British Library for championing the collection! Andrew. Hmm are we going to need to include a dislaimer with regards to some of the captions? Eg: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Scalp_dance,_Blackfoot_Indians_%28HS85-10-18743%29_original.tif -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Progress...
On 26 July 2013 12:48, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote: As with other inventions that produced an inferior product at a much lower price, from the printing press to the steam-driven loom to Wikipedia, what happens now is largely in the hands of the people experimenting with the new tools, rather than defending themselves from them. http://chronicle.com/blogs/conversation/2013/07/08/moocs-and-economic-reality/ Err the mention of Wikipedia is a throwaway line in an article about massive open online courses. I'm not seeing the significance. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Planned school curriculum by MPAA
On 24 September 2013 17:42, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/09/mpaa-school-propaganda/ “This thinly disguised corporate propaganda is inaccurate and inappropriate,” says Mitch Stoltz, an intellectual property attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, who reviewed the material at WIRED’s request. “It suggests, falsely, that ideas are property and that building on others’ ideas always requires permission,” Stoltz says. “The overriding message of this curriculum is that students’ time should be consumed not in creating but in worrying about their impact on corporate profits.” I suggest we see if WMF commenting, possibly in a blog post or similar, would help avert such anti-sharing foolishness. - d. Might not be a great idea Its an improvement on previous attempts (to start with It doesn't appear to violate the GFDL) and we would actually benefit from our uploaders having a working knowledge of copyright. Knowing all the exceptions is something best left to more experienced users. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Planned school curriculum by MPAA
On 25 September 2013 19:33, Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com wrote: It has something to do with countering falsehoods and educating folks about the full range of content rights. Their 2nd grade materials state: Property comes in many forms: when we buy a book, we own that book. It’s our property, but we don’t own the right to reproduce that book and then sell it or give it away. That’s stealing. Um, no. A Creative Commons SA book, The course covers creative commons. a public domain work or expired copyright work can indeed be reproduced. And it's not stealing. Varies. what can catch you out there is that it may be possible to copyright typography (in the UK that copyright lasts for 20 years). geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia and Internet2
On 12 October 2013 21:41, Jasper Deng jas...@jasperswebsite.com wrote: We could change that. Suppose a university wants to request the entire knowledgebase of Wikidata or another project, or if we need to do a mass transfer of data from them. Still not significant. The only really large database we have is the commons image database and a sneaker net might be the most practical option there. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] The British Library releases 1 million images
On 15 December 2013 19:36, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote: The images contain metadata, which could be used for categorisation,at the book level. Not that useful. If you look at the images a lot are simply decorations and there are a fair number of duplications. The whole point of the wiki model is that we make incremental steps towards completion. An analogy could be drawn with Wikipedia's stub articles. Commons already has 19 million images to make incremental steps on. En.Wikipedia has 4.4 million articles total, even the stubs are a lot more searchable and it has more people. It's not good for us to lobby institutions to release media, and then decline to accept it. So we need to decide in advance what we are looking at. With 19 million already we've reach the stage where we should probably be more selective. I would have liked the release to have been direct to Commons; at least, I would have liked the opportunity to debate whether to accept it. I hope that the next tome such an release is being considered, we will be in a better position to facilitate the former. Having the images on flickr isn't too bad. They are still searchable and fairly easy to import although my search results have been turning up less than 1% that area really of interest an even then the quality isn't always usable. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] The British Library releases 1 million images
On 17 December 2013 20:08, Matthew Flaschen matthew.flasc...@gatech.eduwrote: As Andrew said, the interesting question is whether the Commons community can effectively help curate/add metadata for this unidentified content. Even if we could a lot of the images could do with some preprocessing to remove things like stray text. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] 2013-14 Round 2 FDC/annual plan grants timeline moved out by a month: proposals due April 1, 2014
On 18 December 2013 17:09, Tomasz W. Kozlowski tom...@twkozlowski.netwrote: This is so untrue I don't even know where to start. Perhaps having a look at the latest Foundation report and the 2013-14 Annual Plan might be good places to begin your research, geni. I'm aware that the EMF funds things beside the servers. That doesn't change the fact that it still funds them (some squids? in Europe being the only exception I can recall). -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] The British Library releases 1 million images
On 19 December 2013 09:07, Jane Darnell jane...@gmail.com wrote: I like the stray text around the images - it shows that the picture is from a book, rather than a separate unattached file like a photo or engraving, and the captions are necessary in most cases. Not for use in articles. For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eaton_Socon_Castle -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Porn blocking in the UK: en:wp blocks on O2
On 22 December 2013 13:35, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: For your amusement: http://pseudomonas.dreamwidth.org/120535.html We are strictly-HTTPS to censorious regimes like the UK, aren't we? - d. If people chose to opt into censorship then its a bit outside our remit. Beyond having an extensive article on the subject. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Porn blocking in the UK: en:wp blocks on O2
On 22 December 2013 20:51, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 22 December 2013 19:31, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: On 22 December 2013 13:35, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: For your amusement: http://pseudomonas.dreamwidth.org/120535.html We are strictly-HTTPS to censorious regimes like the UK, aren't we? If people chose to opt into censorship then its a bit outside our remit. Beyond having an extensive article on the subject. No, that's the filter you have to explicitly opt out of. A positive choice is required to go in either direction. The opt in opt out thing is mostly just political PR. In any case, discriminatory or defamatory filter labeling is something it is in the public interest to inform on and quite possibly protest against. I'm not sure that is the best way to approach the wikidata community. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dells are backdored
On 29 December 2013 12:55, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote: Can we please stop paying the Microsoft and NSA taxes The WMF doesn't. and start buying datacenter equipment which costs a lot less? Cubieboard/Cubietrucks for instance? Ref.: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/catalog-reveals-nsa-has-back-doors-for-numerous-devices-a-940994.html Best regards, James Using non standard data center equipment is a great way to add costs. As for security given the limited resources the WMF has whenever GCHQ, FSB and MSS have wanted to get in they have and there is nothing we can do about this. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright URAA trolls on Wikimedia Commons
On 30 December 2013 11:26, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.comwrote: Hoi Tomasz, You have a really strong opinion. When you read this thread, you will notice that it is not appreciated by many and seen as disruptive. Can you appreciate it in this way? You argument about re-users is valid when you turn around the argument as well; as long as we do NOT have a take down notice re-users are better served by the continuation of the presence of images. Thanks, GerardM No because then reusers also get hit which a bunch of takedown notices (or lawsuits) which is decidedly disruptive for them. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] WG: Invitation to Chapters and Photographers for the European Parliament Project 2014
On 3 January 2014 16:22, Olaf Kosinsky olaf.kosin...@gmail.com wrote: Happy New Year to Everyone! After the holidays I'd like to make another approach to you and your chapters about Wikipedians in the European Parliament. * have you already forwarded this invitation to your local community? I expect that has been done * has you chapter already decided about supporting volunteers participating in this project? Sending people to Brussels and Strasbourg for reasons other than to lobby on IP issues is not a good use of WMF donors money. You want 766 photos total. Find one person in Brussels (not Strasbourg even the majority of MEPs accept that Strasbourg is a bad idea at this point) and give them whatever support they need to get the photos. * have you - if you are interested - already signed up for participation? Of course not. Strasbourg is several hundred miles away across the English channel. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF employee writing articles for $300
Sarah, when you read this, again I don't give a rats if you are paid-editing, more power to you actually. Unfortunately in this instance you haven't done so in what one would deem to be an ethical way based upon what the community expects, This would be the community of the project from which you are blocked indefinitely. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid editing v. paid advocacy (editing)
On 10 January 2014 21:06, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: Quite. Museums' self-interest in employing a Wikipedian-in-Residence is often quite evident from the way the position is described (raise our profile etc.) And what about, say, the Henry Ford Museum? Or the Volkswagen museum? Is that not knowledge? Is it evil, because it's part of a business? The term you are looking for is propaganda. Or PR if you like being invited to a certain class of party. Which reminds me – I often think it odd that Wikimedia will fund a Wikipedian-in-Residence for some regional tourist attraction (think the Welsh Coastal Path project, or the York Museum), You've never actually been to the York Museum have you? Its a typical municipal museum. IE a place to dump all the historical stuff that you can just leave sitting around in the street. Its collection is better than some but only due to its age. The tourist targeting museum in the area would be the Jorvik Viking Centre. I'd assume the largest tourist draw is actually the National Railway Museum (certainly it has the best class of cameras) but that is a national collection rather than regional. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?
On 16 January 2014 13:02, Emmanuel Engelhart kel...@kiwix.org wrote: Dirac, a free codec developed by the BBC, seems to be a good solution. Do people have some experiences with Dirac? No. BBC managed to get it working dedicated machines a few years back and I think there is an alpha trans-coder out there but people have lost interest. Theora is good enough for the no compromise on freedom mob and development interest is moving towards webM. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [Wikimediauk-l] WMUK slide scanner
On 19 February 2014 00:34, Newyorkbrad newyorkb...@gmail.com wrote: I'm surprised not to see any replies to this particular thread. It seems to me to be a no-brainer (to use a nonce-word that I hate) that imaging equipment for local wiki organizations in a position to make good use of it to upload free content for the projects should be a high priority for funding at whatever level. There are some fairly solid practical problems. Firstly scanning is boring. Trying to get volunteers to do it on a large scale is going to be difficult. Secondly GLAMS tend to prefer that material handling be limited to professionals or their internal volunteers only Thirdly the copyright of slides is often messy. If the original photographer has died and they didn't mention copyright in their will any copyrights could well be held by multiple people. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Ukraine -- is everyone safe?
On 20 February 2014 17:32, Galileo Vidoni gali...@gmail.com wrote: Please refrain from using this list for political claims. The purpose of this thread was to know if our WMUA fellows are safe. That is already a political question. Most of Ukraine or even Kiev is no more dangerous than usual. Being safe means not challenging the government or being part of the police force. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open letter from Wikimedia Argentina regarding URAA
On 24 February 2014 20:51, Galileo Vidoni gali...@gmail.com wrote: Dear movement fellows, Wikimedia Argentina would like to express its support for the letter by Wikimedia Israel regarding URAA-motivated massive content deletions in Wikimedia Commons. Yet, we would like to express our view not only to the Foundation BoT but also to all Wikimedia editors, and especially to those working in Wikimedia Commons. Volunteers from Argentina have been among the most affected by the policy adopted by Wikimedia Commons administrators regarding images that could fall under URAA copyright provisions. Argentine copyright law provides that images enter the public domain only 25 years after their production and 20 after their first documented publication. You really should cite the relevant law if you want commons to pay attention to you. Okey I get that the 20 years come from Article 34 but I'm not sure where the 25 years comes from. This relatively generous criterion has enabled unaffiliated volunteers and we as Wikimedia Argentina to enrich Commons with hundreds of thousands of historical images that are absolutely free under Argentine law: images of the political and every day life of the country, of its culture, of its popular idols, of its joyful and dark days, of its customs and architecture. Absolutely free? Not so. Due to Article 31 pretty much any photo that shows a person who hasn't been dead for 20 years isn't free (this is a side effect of Argentina going for a rather extreme form of personality rights) I'd also advise you against hosting locally. Under Article 72 bis (d) copyright violations can carry a prison sentence. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open letter from Wikimedia Argentina regarding URAA
On 26 February 2014 22:39, Galileo Vidoni gali...@gmail.com wrote: [Sorry for this excurse] Dear Geni, the 20 years indeed come from article 24 of law 11 723. The 25 years come from the Berne Convention. But that merely established a minimum under international law. Unless you have some case law that says otherwise I'd suggest that article 6 applies to unpublished photographs which results in an effective term of life+10 for unpublished photographs (although life+30 could be gained through careful timing of publication). In any case, Argentine copyright law is already known and documented in Commons, and we have been using a specific template (PD-AR-Photo) for years. See the last section of the template talk page which covers some of the issues the template has with US law. I'm afraid years of use doesn't mean that it has been reviewed by common's more serious copyright nerds. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open letter from Wikimedia Argentina regarding URAA
On 28 February 2014 08:18, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: This supports what I noted: Commons increasingly just can't be relied upon as a repository for the other Wikimedia projects. Given the general failure of such projects to file exemption doctrine policies they wouldn't be able to host the content either per the Resolution:Licensing policy they wouldn't be able to host the images either. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open letter from Wikimedia Argentina regarding URAA
On 28 February 2014 12:43, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: You're justifying the observed, serious problems with current actions by saying but they should work in theory! No. Its more that they are features rather than problems. There have always been images hosted locally that commons won't touch. The English Wikipedia fair use stuff is probably the best known but the polish wikinews also has an Exemption Doctrine Policy. Other projects are free to file them per Resolution:Licensing policy. Of course it could be interesting to watch them try and argue that such images are PD under US law but that at the end of the day between them and the foundation. Commons provides the base-load of free images. If projects want to use unfree images then they need to do that locally taking their language norms into account. The trouble is that (a) there's no natural limit of caution - we could question every single file on Commons and require OTRS for every single one *years* after the fact (as is happening with many of the files the current issue is about) - but we don't. Why is that? Because we have no particular reason to believe they violate US copyright law. (b) the Commons community has already gone way past the limits *the WMF has explicitly said are fully OK*. The WMF have said no such thing. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open letter on open letters (Was: Open letter from Wikimedia Argentina regarding URAA)
On 28 February 2014 06:41, Dennis Pierri dennis6...@gmail.com wrote: It would be nice if all of the chapters send to their governments a petition to allow a global standardized use of media just for wikimedia projects, it is a big problem that every country has different laws on copyright and public domain media, and that wikimedia has to comply with U.S law just because the servers are in there, we as a community should ask a global standardized media handling law for wikimedia which might or might not include giving special licenses for wikimedia projects, trying to keep in line with the foundation ideals, I know it sounds a bit crazy, but hey it's the biggest compilation of human knowlege, it should be following laws (copyright and public domain in this case) that all of human kind reach in consensus, not just the laws of the place where the servers are. D Wikimedia only licences aren't helpful. Finding out their position on goverment works with expired copyrights is somewhat more useful. Brits did it back in 2005: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2005-May/022055.html -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open letter on open letters (Was: Open letter from Wikimedia Argentina regarding URAA)
On 28 February 2014 21:49, Dennis Pierri dennis6...@gmail.com wrote: The servers are still in the US, has anybody proposed a global effort? Will Wikimedia move the servers to EU in case this is accepted? No. There is quite a bit of stuff on Wikimedia severs that is in breach of criminal law in parts of the EU. Nothing special just the usual mix of blasphemy, breach of court orders, insulting foreign heads of state and extreme pornography. There may be some other stuff but there is a limit to the number of legal systems I can keep track of. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open letter from Wikimedia Argentina regarding URAA
On 1 March 2014 19:58, ??? wiki-l...@phizz.demon.co.uk wrote: On 28/02/2014 01:23, geni wrote: We could do that but it pretty much removes commons only advantage over say imgur or flickr. We want the images on commons to be free. Not simply stuff no one has got around to complaining about yet, You are deluding yourself and reusers if you believe and promote that nonsense. On Commons you have people uploading works from flickr, and other sites, where the account that is being scraped is anonymous. In many cases after the images have been uploaded the original account is deleted. You have no guarantee that the account that the images were scraped from held the copyright in the first place, and as such you are unable to pass that guarantee on to any one else. Want means its an objective not something we have actually archived yet. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open letter from Wikimedia Argentina regarding URAA
On 1 March 2014 23:59, ??? wiki-l...@phizz.demon.co.uk wrote: On 01/03/2014 23:06, geni wrote: On 1 March 2014 19:58, ??? wiki-l...@phizz.demon.co.uk wrote: You have no guarantee that the account that the images were scraped from held the copyright in the first place, and as such you are unable to pass that guarantee on to any one else. Want means its an objective not something we have actually archived yet. Then it is an objective that cannot be fulfilled unless you get written clarification from all the accounts that are being scraped on flickr and elsewhere, that the images contained within the accounts were taken by the account holder. There are various approaches. Personally I'd like to see the software modified so images can be tagged by level of certainty with regards to their copyright status. Many flickr accounts collect images found on the web. Many of them upload those images under a CC license, because images on the web are all public domain. Those are usually fairly obvious and can be avoided for the most part. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open letter from Wikimedia Argentina regarding URAA
On 2 March 2014 08:55, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 2 March 2014 02:01, Mark delir...@hackish.org wrote: I personally would welcome more attention to our actual mission, producing free content, rather than the mission some of our members seem to be engaged in, making the *.wikipedia.org sites look nice in the short term, even if nobody external can reuse the content. You're seriously characterising the present dispute as this? Its a pretty accurate description. What do you think the law says? -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open letter from Wikimedia Argentina regarding URAA
On 2 March 2014 20:50, Chris McKenna cmcke...@sucs.org wrote: On Sun, 2 Mar 2014, Mark wrote: On 3/2/14, 5:31 PM, Chris McKenna wrote: There seems to be a disconnect between what Commons sees as it's mission: To be a repository of Free media; and what other projects see as Commons' mission: To be a repository of media for use on Wikimedia projects. But since the other Wikimedia projects should be producing free-content encyclopedias, this is no disconnect: Commons should host Free media, and the other projects should include Free media. Otherwise the other projects' content cannot be reused externally, and they are not free-content encyclopedias. You've missed the point. Commons is not at present a reliable source of media, Free or otherwise, because media gets deleted because once someone alleges that it is not free it gets deleted if the original uploader cannot prove it is free, regardless of the merits of the allegation. As someone with OTRS access I beg to differ The Foundation has said do not delete images that *might* be unfree under URAA unless there is a takedown notice yet the images continue to be deleted. or without such actual knowledge of infringement The reality is that the Resolution:Licensing_policy: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Licensing_policy Is still the standard we work to. The relevant section is All projects are expected to host only content which is under a Free Content License, or which is otherwise free as recognized by the 'Definition of Free Cultural Works' as referenced above. Individual projects can file an Exemption Doctrine Policy to get around that however commons is explicitly banned from doing so. This is entirely irrelevant to the attitude at Commons. English Wikipedia is Free according to the definition it uses, which is essentally Free for practical purposes as an Encyclopaedia and that is applied reliably. Nope. Probably the closest to an actual description of the English wikipedia position would be free in the US unless certain record and film companies decide to become as lawsuit happy as they are commonly portrayed and even that isn't done consistently. In contrast, Commons is arbitrarily and inconsistently Free and appears to be prioritising point making over being a practical media repository. You are free to disagree about en.wp's choices, but this does not excuse the attitude of Commons to the Wikimedia community. You are aware that most commons bods are active on other projects? -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open letter from Wikimedia Argentina regarding URAA
On 2 March 2014 16:35, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: Indeed. The extreme paranoia over images people created themselves versus the ridiculously sloppy standards for anything on Flickr (a bot can't meaningfully verify an image) makes Commons merely seem capricious. No the same standards are applied to flickr images. The bot is verifying against later changes of license not that the license claim is correct. The reality is though that flickr images tend to be either fine of straightforward copyvios so arguments over less known areas of copyright law tend not to be an issue. Its mostly a matter of spotting the stream has an unlikely range of images or cameras. tl;dr Commons is behaving like damage that needs to be worked around. If people who consider themselves part of the Commons community don't like that being noted, they're the ones who need to consider changing; their intransigence up to now is *why* Commons appears to behave like damage. Because you and various other members of the project seem to view insisting on free content as damaging. Fundamentally there isn't much that can be done about. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open letter from Wikimedia Argentina regarding URAA
On 2 March 2014 22:20, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 2 March 2014 13:51, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: Its a pretty accurate description. What do you think the law says? It's possible, if you want people and organisations to stop their moves against you, that snideness and word play may not serve to convince them that you have any evidenced interest in working with others, and don't have to be treated as simply intransigent. Given that attempt to explain how the law actually works have been ignored there isn't much we can do to avoid being perceived as intransigent. If people won't listen there isn't much we can do other than add them to the list of people who unaccountably have better things do on weekends than read through copyright statutes and caselaw. It may be worth noting at this point that the Israelis and the Argentinians face two different problems. The Argentinian one probably can't be solve short of the US government adopting the rule of the shorter term (assuming stability in Argentinian copyright law in the meantime). The Israeli problem on the other hand could probably be solved by getting their government to issue a statement on the status of their copyrights overseas (the Brits did back in 2005). I'm not up enough on the Israeli Freedom of Information Law to know if that would be the appropriate mechanism ( and in any case I'm not an Israeli citizen or resident so I can't file one) but even if it isn't I expect the chapter would get a response to a query. But that is up to them. I can make an Israeli do this. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] COI editing by WMF staff
On 17 April 2014 15:37, Russavia russavia.wikipe...@gmail.com wrote: Employees and contractors of the Wikimedia Foundation shall not edit articles relating to the Wikimedia Foundation, broadly construed, but at rather directed to raise potential edits on the talk pages of affected articles. This directive does not apply to the reverting vandalism, removing copyright violations or potentially libellous materials. Such a directive for WMF people would be easy to make, easy to implement, easy to enforce, and would demonstrate that the Wikimedia Foundation itself is at the forefront, and setting an example for other organisations and leading by example. Easy to enforce? By whom? The foundation? Tracking all edits by foundation staff is not a good use of foundation time. Admins? We have better things to do with our time. The wider community? Not many have much awareness of that level of meta policy. You are trying to write and drama generator but not one people have time for. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] How Wikimedia could help languages to survive
On 20 April 2014 04:46, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote: I'd say that Scots Gaelic could be a good test (Wikimedia UK help needed!). It's a language with ~70k of speakers and if it's possible to achieve 100 active editors per month, we could say that it could somehow work in other cases, as well. Err they are about to have a referendum on independence -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] How Wikimedia could help languages to survive
On 20 April 2014 09:32, Hubert Laska hubert.la...@gmx.at wrote: What do you want to say with that? That it is thus no longer necessary, gaelic to lead as an example? Wikipedia does´nt end at national borders! Wikimedia UK however does. There is also the issue of changing political status. While Westminister may not be overly concerned with regards to Gaelic we can't predict how an independent Holyrood would react. -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Internet rights approved in Brazil
On 23 April 2014 23:20, Everton Zanella Alvarenga everton.alvare...@okfn.org wrote: Now YES we can celebrate. http://globalvoicesonline.org/2014/04/23/brazil-marcocivil-netmundial2014-senate-approves-bill/ Cheers! Tom For what? You know somewhere there is an ABIN employee vaguely wondering if they should make certain things public. Then deciding that Rio de Janeiro is preferable to Moscow. Eh its not as if ABIN had a great record of obeying the previous set of laws. geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Invitation to WMF April 2014 Metrics Activities Meeting: Thursday, May 1, 18:00 UTC
Whats with what looks like a reasonable mixing desk in: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_Foundation_Monthly_Metrics_Meeting_May_1,_2014-8198.jpg On 1 May 2014 22:59, Caitlin Cogdill ccogd...@wikimedia.org wrote: Thanks, Victor, these are awesome! This one is my favorite :) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_Foundation_Monthly_Metrics_Meeting_May_1,_2014-8270.jpg On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Victor Grigas vgri...@wikimedia.org wrote: Photos of the meeting available here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListFiles/Vgrigasilshowall=1 On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Praveena Maharaj pmaha...@wikimedia.org wrote: REMINDER: This meeting starts in 30 minutes. On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Praveena Maharaj pmaha...@wikimedia.orgwrote: Dear all, The next WMF metrics and activities meeting will take place on Thursday, May 1, 2014 at 6 PM UTC (11 AM PDT). The IRC channel is #wikimedia-office on irc.freenode.net and the meeting will be broadcast as a live YouTube stream. The current structure of the meeting is: * Review of key metrics including the monthly report card, but also specialized reports and analytic * Review of financials * Welcoming recent hires * Brief presentations on recent projects, with a focus on highest priority initiatives * Update and QA with the Executive Director, if available Please review https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings for further information about how to participate. We’ll post the video recording publicly after the meeting. Thank you, Praveena -- Praveena Maharaj Executive Assistant to the VP of Engineering Product Development www.wikimedia.org ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- *Victor Grigas* Storyteller https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Knv6D6Thi0 Wikimedia Foundation vgri...@wikimedia.org https://donate.wikimedia.org/ ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Caitlin Cogdill Fundraiser Program Associate Wikimedia Foundation Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! *https://donate.wikimedia.org https://donate.wikimedia.org/* https://shop.wikimedia.org ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia and Universities
On 6 May 2014 15:28, Newyorkbrad newyorkb...@gmail.com wrote: Is there one place, perhaps on Meta, where a Wikipedian/Wikimedian could find a summary/briefing on the various different programs that exist? Newyorkbrad The ones that are relevant to the english wikipedia can be found ad https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Student_assignment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Education_noticeboard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Historical_page_for_school_and_university_projects -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Child Protection Policy
On 23 May 2014 19:49, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote: People can obviously discuss whether the policies are optimal and/or sufficient, but I'm just asking what the current policies are. Then stick to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk Straight What is the policy on X questions aren't really the purpose of this mailing list. -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Participating on Wikipediocracy
On 24 May 2014 00:06, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote: OK, can you explain why you participate on Wikipediocracy? Thanks, Edward! I was starting to worry that no one would ask. Doesn't it strike you as odd that the question came from an active wikipediocracy memeber? I participate on WO because I think every voice deserves to be heard. And I will go wherever people feel comfortable speaking freely to hear them. You know where 4chan is I assume. The trash talk. . . Most of the concerns I've heard about WO involve the snarky, personal comments that are front and center in the forums. I know this makes it very difficult for many people to listen to anything else they have to say. I've called them out on this a few times, but I was reminded that everyone is there for different reasons and the trash talk somehow works for a few of them. What can I say? The great thing about free speech is that everyone is free to say anything. The only thing I can think of that might be better is that everyone is free to ignore anything. ;) Again you cite free speech. In effect you're saying that the most compelling thing you can say for your activity is that it's not literally illegal (XKCD 1357 alt text) Beyond the trash talk are some very real concerns from some very insightful people. Thats your opinion. Wikipedia is a fairly mature project at this point. We are where we are as the result of over a decade of refinement by thousands of people with each of those refinements destruction tested against whatever the internet can throw at them. If you're concerned about whether I'm getting accurate information, I don't take for granted anything said there without a secondary source- just like anything said here. Some of the concerns I've heard there seem to be taboo in the mainstream WP community. Given the size of the project and your fairly breath interaction with it what makes you think that you are in a position to make that judgement? It's very interesting that WO was brought up when I asked about Child Protection Policies, for example. Not really. The issue had already been brought up on a thread on wikipediocracy that you were posting on. Makes your claim that I'm just asking what the current policies are. lack a certain credibility. Harassment Policy is another issue that seems to be unwelcome in some forums. The relevant talk page has over 100 entries in its archives. Finally, I ask everyone to respect my own right to free speech. I'm not aware of anyone planning to have you arrested. The US right to free speech involves governments something wikipedia is not. Sure wikipedia is pretty extreme on the spectrum on the degree of speech is will allow but that doesn't change the fact your right to free speech is between you and your government. I'm hoping to get to know all of the people in this forum better. This is a mailing list for dealing with cross project issues. It isn't for getting to know people. It's harder for me to follow along here because a lot of the stuff is very specific and often discussed with little context. I'll catch up. In the meantime, I'll continue asking questions,some of which may be inconvenient. Eh as long as you stick to the relevant venue which is not really this mailing list. This is for people who already have the knowledge base and are trying to move into genuinely new areas or have hit an issue that can't be dealt with through the usual project level channels. Like I said, I am not Lila; I'm that guy who asks stuff while everyone else is hoping he just keeps his mouth shut. :P So not an editor? -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Participating on Wikipediocracy
On 24 May 2014 08:24, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote: Hi Pete, you do realize that Lila reads this list, right? That seems rather candid for someone who works so closely with the WMF. If that was not for public eyes, you might consider a public apology. Not for your own professional interests, mind you, but because Lila's a person like the rest of us and she has feelings. Best. ,Wil Hey what happened to disclaiming any relevant link between the two of you? Not exactly consistent with you canvasing for an apology on her behalf. Of course it is somewhat alarming that you are suggesting that our new ED can't handle robust criticism but I personally prefer to trust the judgment of the board and other involved parties. -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] About Wikipedia medical entries
On 27 May 2014 15:22, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org wrote: Ah, that explains it. :-) Regardless, Don't diagnose yourself with Wikipedia seems to be infinitely good advice, regardless of any hyperbole about article accuracy! The problem is the number of doctors who use wikipedia. -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cost of Wikimedia Conference 2014
On 2 June 2014 14:38, Jon Davies jon.dav...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: £2600, our current estimate, seems good value. Some bloke is charging me £120 to come and tell me my dishwasher is broken These things are hard to calculate. You could however get a Canon EF 180mm f/3.5L Macro and a Tamron 150-600mm for that price. (incidentally the macro lens could be used to get a better version of this pic https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Domitianus_II_obverse_ashmolean.JPG I don't have anything long enough) -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sport photo
On 6 June 2014 16:20, Russavia russavia.wikipe...@gmail.com wrote: Pyb, great stuff. It would be great if we could increase coverage of sports which we don't cover very well, if at all, on Commons. Can I make some suggestions where video would be great. 1. Dwarf tossing[1] 2. Bog snorkelling[2] 3. Cheese rolling[3] Cheese rolling is tricky because it only happens once a year and is legally borderline. What I'd like to see is more woman's sport. I'd put good odds that WMUK could get someone into the woman's FA cup final for example. -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons and OCILLA
On 8 June 2014 12:21, matanya mata...@foss.co.il 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please be considerate of everyone's time.
On 17 June 2014 00:23, Steven Walling steven.wall...@gmail.com wrote: The Wikimedia Foundation does not write nor edit content on Wikipedia, nor does it dictate editorial policy. All of the content is written, edited, and controlled by whomever would like to volunteer their time to improve it. As such, this is often why the response to a statement like Pretty much any article in my specialist area (which is actually not all that specialist) has serious problems is to invite you to edit it.[1] User:Peter Damian is currently subject to a community ban on the English wikipedia. Original details at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidentsoldid=305732814#Enough_is_enough -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let Commons do what it knows best and use Wikidata for it and the rest
On 17 June 2014 21:06, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: I predict this will be unacceptable to Commons admins. The reasons advanced will be legal fears. (The actual reasons will be loss of power for Commons admins banned on a pile of other projects.) Not all of us are banned on other projects. In practice what is suggested is possible already. Per Resolution:Licensing policy local projects can have an exemption doctrine policy (incidentally does anyone know if there is a central list of these?) and upload stuff that can't be uploaded on commons. As long as it doesn't then get transferred to commons this isn't a problem for commons. The group it actually sucks for is OTRS. Dealing with copyright issues raised about the English Wikipedia is fairly straightforward. Commons is slightly harder but still doable. Finding admins from other projects presents more of a challenge. -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons
On 18 June 2014 08:43, Peter Southwood peter.southw...@telkomsa.net wrote: This is a strong argument for locating Uncommons outside the USA. Somewhere where the copyright laws allow the widest range of images to be kept. Images can be tagged for where they are free and where they are not free. Sure if you want the severs to be confiscated within a week. No 1st amendment outside the US. -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lets delete everything from commons (was The tragedy of Commons)
On 22 June 2014 08:30, Itzik Edri it...@infra.co.il wrote: The story continues. WMIL uploaded a letter from the Ministry of Justice, addressed to the Commons Community, which confirm that the government don't have interest on this photos No it doesn't. It simply restates how the law works within Israel. Which we already know. What we need is a statement that says that they regard the copyright expiration on government works (private works are a secondary problem) to be global. -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lets delete everything from commons (was The tragedy of Commons)
On 23 June 2014 07:31, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com wrote: that sounds like a rather simple statement to make. is there a reason the isreali govermmemt does not want to do that, or is this somenthing which follows autimatically? As far as I'm aware they haven't been asked. Really all we need is an Israeli citizen to actual ask them. -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lets delete everything from commons (was The tragedy of Commons)
On 23 June 2014 10:03, Itzik Edri it...@infra.co.il wrote: Hi Geni, I wonder when was the last time you, or any other person who responded till now requested his government to make a public statement - in any issue, not only related to this issue, and the government so quickly done that, exactly as he way them to do so - without a long process which involve 100 legal advisers, ministries, committee discussions and many others steps involve. Probably the last time anyone filed a freedom of information request. For a direct example it would be the 7th of April with regards to a request about bank of England notes. See OTRS ticket # 2014041010009626 -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lets delete everything from commons (was The tragedy of Commons)
On 23 June 2014 11:41, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: Hoi, The Israeli government is clear in that they claim no copyright. No they aren't. How can you argue and from an US legal point of view and insist that another government is to claim copyright in order to give a license.. It will never be considered in a court of law because it is the Israeli government who would be seeking justice in a US court of law. Are you under impression that governments can't do exactly that? ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lets delete everything from commons (was The tragedy of Commons)
On 23 June 2014 13:00, Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com wrote: In my opinion as soon the letter is submitted through OTRS, the same letter releases this content and defines that it's allowed to have it in Commons. URAA extends the copyright, it doesn't block the possibility to renounce to the copyright. Nothing in the letter renounces copyrights held outside Israel. -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer
On 10 July 2014 22:21, Juergen Fenn schneeschme...@googlemail.com wrote: I don't intend to bother you when you are making an encyclopædia, Brion, but if this is the stance the Wikimedia Foundation takes it's time for me to leave the project. I expect the Wikimedia Foundation to respect a community consensus. If you think you have another community of crowdsourcing workers then go ahead. I won't tolerate this. Regards, Jürgen. The reallit is that an RFC edited by 131 people total is rather borderline in terms of community consensus with regards to new features and significantly lower than [[Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Default State RFC]]. There is also the factor that any new design results in a certain degree of backlash. Sure the design has problems (I've just noticed that links to images will break if the page they are on moves) but so did monobook and vector when they were first released some of the issues have been fixed and most people have got used to using skins other than classic and don't complain that much. There is also the political side that English wikipedia has resisted several fairly major changes. Pending changes, Visual editor and article rating. The opposition to flow is already starting to dig in. While I'd hope the Visual editor mess isn't held against us there is the issue that a pattern is starting to emerge. The WMF probably can't afford to lose another public facing project to English Wikipedia intransigence. -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] [tangential] What happens when digital cities are abandoned?
On 14 July 2014 12:00, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/07/what-happens-when-digital-cities-are-abandoned/373941/ Article on what once-thriving Internet communities feel like. Includes Jason Scott of the Archive Team. Digital history is however far better documented than even fairly recent meatspace stuff. For example there a canals where we have no records of them for periods lasting decades. More commonly we have the stuff published at the yearly shareholder's meeting at little else. -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Unacceptable -- CheckUser abuse gone uninvestigated
On 2 August 2014 06:25, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 7:25 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: Are you able to specify which policy or statement entitles you to the information you request? I can find no basis for it in the privacy policy, the Meta checkuser policy or the checkuser page on Commons. Can you also outline for your audience what harm you believe you have suffered? Regarding policy, Russavia is claiming that the CU results were given to someone who wasnt a CU on Commons. In my experience sometimes that happens in cross-wiki investigations, but it should not be given to someone who isnt a CU anywhere, and it would be a very clear violation of CU policy for it to have been given to someone who wasnt WMF identified. It would be good if Russavia could clarify, and/or the OC could confirm, that the person who received the CU data was WMF identified at least. I am guessing that Russavia has yet to hear how the CU on his account complies with the CU policy. There must be a valid reason to check a user. Was there a serious concern that Russavia was using alternative accounts in a prohibited manner? Was he vandalising? Hmm. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Russavia/Archive By May 2014 there were certainly suspicions on en.wikipedia that Russavia was socking. It would be fairly understandable if the relevant authorities on en tried to gather further information. If Russavia has a problem with this he is free not to use sockpupets on the English Wikipedia. -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Unacceptable -- CheckUser abuse gone uninvestigated
On 2 August 2014 09:17, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: I'm guessing you mean June 2014, as the only earlier investigation was April 2013, which was a royal mess. No. The April 2013 check was extended beyond en. No reason not to extend it to commons. -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Rarest records
On 4 August 2014 15:53, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 4 August 2014 15:11, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote: but the thesis that some 78rpm records constitute the only surviving example of a particular recording, with no master in an archive somewhere, sent chills up my spine. This is surprisingly common with indie records. Frequently, a few hundred pieces of vinyl are the *only* copies of the music in question. Eh there used to be fairground/seaside booths where you could cut your own record. One the plus side this stuff should last longer than say floppy discs. -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Effective censorship of Wikipedia by Google
On 4 August 2014 10:49, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: We don't know yet for sure what the disappeared page is. I would advise caution before spreading it across the Net and back. Remember that Wikipedia is *big and scary* to people outside it. It's quite possible this is something that really doesn't belong in a BLP, but the subject doesn't quite know what to do about it. If I had to bet I'd say more likely its a passing mention in an article on a small village somewhere. In so far as we know what standards Google is working to BLP subjects would generally be too high profile. -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] let's elect people to serve on the wikimedia engineering community team! (brainstorming)
On 7 August 2014 00:56, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: I'll stand by what I said previously. The community liaisons (two Is) are currently in the role of trying to sell the community on bad software. Good software, surprisingly, doesn't need hired community liaisons to roam around the large wikis to explain and defend its virtues. If you want to respond to the substantive point, please do. Otherwise, I don't really think it's fair nor productive to simply make appeals to emotion. They've got two roles. They've got to try and get the developers to try and introduce their changes in the way thee community accepts. They've also got the role of keeping the community informed about what is going on. Given that the developers want their software to be accepted (and lets face it the community has a conservative element) there is a lot of pressure in the direction of PR tactics. -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Flogging dead horses (was Re: Superprotect user right, Coming to a wiki near you)
On 18 August 2014 04:13, Wiki Billinghurst billinghurstw...@gmail.com wrote: Are we there yet? This subject has been so done to death, that the corpse of the dead horse that has been flogged is going to rise as a zombie and eat out your brains. There is next to no original thought coming through just verbiage, and it is time that people subjecting the whole list to the continued indigence. There is an RFC, there is a process being followed, Not really. We left process ago some time ago. For obvious reasons there isn't a process for a clash between the people with root access and 500+ German wikipedians: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Umfragen/Superschutz -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Next steps regarding WMF-community disputes about deployments
On 27 August 2014 05:16, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: And the design community is taking notice: https://news.layervault.com/stories/31897-wikipedia-already-looks-great--just-add-m-on-desktop We already know the design community doesn't like the edit button. Was there any reason you thought we should pay attention to their opinion? -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Next steps regarding WMF-community disputes about deployments
On 26 August 2014 09:39, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: First, I think it's worthwhile in these discussions - in a context of a project where consensus is important - to remember that there are actually many different perspectives on Media Viewer in the community. Even in German Wikipedia, 72 community members voted _against_ disabling Media Viewer Hey you are the one currently ignoring 664 German wikipedians. Thats not logically consistent with objecting to people ignoring smaller numbers. (more in absolute terms, incidentally, than voted for disabling it on English Wikipedia's RFC). You want en to stick a link in sitenotice and up the numbers? -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banners (again)
On 2 December 2014 at 06:53, Lila Tretikov l...@wikimedia.org wrote: All -- we will not have a pop-up banner. And how exactly would you describe this then? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Oversized_donation_notice.png -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons copyright extremism
On 11 December 2014 at 17:54, Jane Darnell jane...@gmail.com wrote: but fop trumps all else when you are outside Not under any legal system I've looked into. Even UK law isn't that liberal. -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons copyright extremism
On 11 December 2014 at 18:04, Russavia russavia.wikipe...@gmail.com wrote: Geni You wouldn't be talking about the Skyy Spirits case would you? http://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/225_f3d_1068.htm This case is not akin to that case in any way, shape or form. That issue was referring to the copyright on the 3D bottle. Refer to https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Copyright_rules_by_subject_matter#Product_packaging The packaging in Steve's photo is 3D and to quote the significant bit of the case: We need not, however, decide whether the label is copyrightable because Ets-Hokin's product shots are based on the bottle as a whole, not on the label. The whole point of the shots was to capture the bottle in its entirety. The defendants have cited no case holding that a bottle of this nature may be copyrightable, and we are aware of none. Indeed, Skyy's position that photographs of everyday, functional, noncopyrightable objects are subject to analysis as derivative works would deprive both amateur and commercial photographers of their legitimate expectations of copyright protection. Because Ets-Hokin's product shots are shots of the bottle as a whole—a useful article not subject to copyright protection—and not shots merely, or even mainly, of its label, we hold that the bottle does not qualify as a preexisting work within the meaning of the Copyright Act. The Steve's photo shows the whole of the packaging not just the images on it. The packaging is clearly functional and his photo has captured the packaging in its entirety. Commons policy does not overule the ninth circuit in this area. But in Steven's case, it is also complicated by Japanese law having to be considered. Having to? I think not. In any case long standing commons practice is only to consider the location of the photographer not the place of origin of the work or artist. Ets-Hokin v. Skyy Spirits, Inc. applies unless you are going to try and claim the packaging is not a useful article. -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons copyright extremism
On 12 December 2014 at 13:04, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: Commons was raising quasi-legal objections that literally nobody else considered a plausible threat model. It's your fault as long as you continue to defend it. In fairness a simple statement from the Israeli government is all that is needed. For the record the UK government has already stated it views crown copyright expired as a world wide thing (this was before the open government license became a thing). However as interesting as these discussions about individual copyright they don't really get to the core problems. 1)How strict should we be about copyright. While I tend towards fairly I accept the wider community may differ. If so we need a well drafted board level statement outlining how strict commons should be. Its a complex problem and will need some real actual lawyers working with some of our more experienced community members 2)Large number of semi automated deletion notices. This is going to happen whatever you do unless you ban all uploads from people who aren't qualified intellectual property lawyers. Eh just look at your average en.wikipedia talk page for a semi active editor. 3)Lack of positive feedback. I'm not sure there is any way around this. Automated notices that image you uploaded is being used on project Y would get annoying for some users. I guess having it as a well advertised feature that people could turn on would be an option. Use by third parties is even harder to track. Short of googling your nic+ CC-BY-SA and the like. Even that only turns up a limited subset of users mind. 4)third parties choosing other projects. Thing is for large dumps of poorly curated content with messy copyright issues things like the internet archive are probably a better match. 5)Some commons admins are behaving problematically. Yes but I'm not sure what to do about that. -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons copyright extremism
On 12 December 2014 at 17:34, Tim Davenport shoehu...@gmail.com wrote: Compare and contrast to the goal of illustrating an encyclopedia with the best images available, Why would we settle for that? The reality is that many of the available images are only so-so. WP:FPC shows we can better them (although if people are going to start hauling phase one cameras around I can only assume that future wikimanias will need to feature weight training gyms and physical therapists). -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] How to fix Commons
On 14 December 2014 at 05:49, Bruentrup claus.bruent...@gmail.com wrote: Not surprisingly my client's OTRS emails have gone unacknowledged with no action taken, and my client's spokesperson was repeatedly insulted and abused on-line at the highly toxic Commons which has become a haven for pirates and infringers. Just ran a search on India Against Corruption on the copyright queue. Nothing. Can only assume any emails were sent to the wrong place -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] How to fix Commons
On 13 December 2014 at 02:48, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: I felt kind of meh about the previous thread, so I'm forking it. geni wrote: 2)Large number of semi automated deletion notices. This is going to happen whatever you do unless you ban all uploads from people who aren't qualified intellectual property lawyers. Eh just look at your average en.wikipedia talk page for a semi active editor. An alternate solution would be to ban automated notices. :-) Individualised ones don't scale Or at least make them far less obnoxious. Been tried. A lot. It doesn't make any difference mind but I assume people will continue trying. Saying if you look over here, you'll see the same or worse is a pretty poor argument, in my opinion. Going after commons for a project wide issue however pretty pointless. Use by third parties is even harder to track. Short of googling your nic+ CC-BY-SA and the like. Even that only turns up a limited subset of users mind. Eh, if they're hotlinking from Commons, we presumably have HTTP referers in the server access logs. Otherwise, there are services (Google Images, TinEye, etc.) that can perform reverse image searches. They tend to object to people trying to run too many automated searches on their services. For Commons, my personal view is that I'd like to see its search functionality suck a lot less. Being worked on https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:CirrusSearch Commons search needs: * search by tag (which we have already with categories, but we're apparently supposed to wait until the magical future of Wikidata); Been on the wishlist for years. * search by color; and * search by file size and type. Doable but I don't think it the CirrusSearch people are working on anything like that. Commons also needs at least four in-browser editors (for rasterized images, vector graphics, audio files, and videos) In browser editing is kinda dicey. and additional supported file upload types (e.g., .ico would be great to have). computer icons in Microsoft Windows? I'd put 3D file formats higher up the list. Not that either will every actually happen. This is a nasty cop-out. Not really. Recognising our limits has its uses and if we can turn the chapters into respected points of contact which GLAMs know will point them in useful direction we at least get to know what is going on. We already do this in a limited fashion, but we need to get better about soliciting and accepting donations to Commons. There's definitely a shared interest in preserving and promoting all kinds of media that we're not doing very well to capture and utilize. There are at least two broad categories I see that could make donations: GLAMs That's ongoing but it has issues with diminishing returns https://geniice.wordpress.com/2011/04/30/the-point-of-diminishing-returns-on-image-donations/ and individuals who have an article that currently has no image or a bad image. Generally works better if done by the project in question rather than commons. -- geni ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
