Am 15.10.2012 21:19, schrieb Theo10011:
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 10:35 PM, Yann Forget yan...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
This announcement is worrying, to say the least.
In other words, the Wikimedia Foundation is doing a partnership with
one of the most retrograde government, which is also a
Your answer would imply that we never ever should try to combine a free
image with any of our logos in a single work (not a collection). I wrote
the reason in a previous mail already. We would have a copyright
violation if the new work is released under a free license since the
logo isn't free
and repository. The content may be free, the
repository may be not free.
Following your concept if a newspaper would use the Commons content, it should
release under free license his website, his logo, his content.
On 03.07.2012 23:47, Tobias Oelgarte wrote:
I don't know how it is handled after US law
that what is in my screen
is mine and that anything is free can be used for any purposes.
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 1:06 AM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
You will have to split between trademark laws and copyright laws. Both
concepts exist separately from each other
Am 04.07.2012 20:52, schrieb David Gerard:
On 4 July 2012 19:22, Samuel Kleinmeta...@gmail.com wrote:
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-18704192
Dunno about OT. The public protests across Europe followed from the
SOPA blackout.
- d.
Not really. The first big protests started at the end
I don't know how it is handled after US law, but if i consider German
law then logos and trademarks are often even in the public domain, but
protected as a trademark itself. But i also think that our logo is
something to protect while being free at the same time. If we go
strictly after the
be not free.
Following your concept if a newspaper would use the Commons content,
it should release under free license his website, his logo, his content.
On 03.07.2012 23:47, Tobias Oelgarte wrote:
I don't know how it is handled after US law, but if i consider German
law then logos and trademarks
logo, his content.
On 03.07.2012 23:47, Tobias Oelgarte wrote:
I don't know how it is handled after US law, but if i consider German law then
logos and trademarks are often even in the public domain, but protected as a
trademark itself. But i also think that our logo is something to protect
Am 21.06.2012 21:55, schrieb Andreas Kolbe:
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 7:50 PM, Todd Allentoddmal...@gmail.com wrote:
This thread isn't about copyvios, and I don't want to get too far
afield, but I think it does kind of show the thought process here
sometimes. From my read of the discussions
Am 21.06.2012 22:24, schrieb Anthony:
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Andreas Kolbejayen...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, Todd has certainly said on-wiki in the past that he would not see a
problem in Wikipedia using a video of rape to illustrate an article on the
topic, provided it were
Am 21.06.2012 22:51, schrieb Anthony:
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
Can you point me to any examples of real child abuse, sexual abuse or of
child sexual abuse?
On Wikipedia? On Commons? Anywhere?
Do i really need to answer
Am 22.06.2012 00:02, schrieb Anthony:
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
Am 21.06.2012 22:51, schrieb Anthony:
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.comwrote:
Can you point me to any examples
Am 18.06.2012 09:21, schrieb David Gerard:
On 18 June 2012 08:00, Tom Morrist...@tommorris.org wrote:
{{sofixit}}
If all the people in favour of filters had spent their time building them
rather than arguing about them, we would have had a wide array of different
solutions, without any
Am 18.06.2012 13:52, schrieb Thomas Morton:
On 18 June 2012 08:00, Tom Morrist...@tommorris.org wrote:
On Monday, 18 June 2012 at 02:44, Tobias Oelgarte wrote:
Every stupid bot could do this. There is no running out of the box
solution at the moment, but the effort to set up something like
Am 18.06.2012 15:06, schrieb Thomas Morton:
It is not convincing since it interferes with the work of our editors
that aren't interested in such a feature.
Seems unlikely. Although please feel to expand on this with specifics.
Any tagging by non neutral definitions would interfere with
Am 19.06.2012 01:39, schrieb Anthony:
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
Am 18.06.2012 14:49, schrieb Anthony:
Have you ever tried to do this? It's not as easy as you are making it
sound, at least it wasn't as of a few years ago, because
Am 17.06.2012 17:16, schrieb Anthony:
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 10:48 AM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote:
So I think my question - if this is so obviously the
right thing, then where are the existing attempts? - still stands as
relevant.
The fact that it is the right thing isn't obvious,
Am 17.06.2012 21:41, schrieb Federico Leva (Nemo):
Andrew Gray, 17/06/2012 15:50:
In short: the almost complete absence of anyone doing *anything*
clever in terms of reusing and repurposing our content strongly
suggests that there are practical barriers to doing so in general,
rather than the
Am 18.06.2012 00:40, schrieb Anthony:
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
It didn't even need to be complete fork. A whitelist copy would most likely
already be sufficient for your needs. It would automatically update any
article on a white
Am 15.06.2012 23:22, schrieb Andreas Kolbe:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:21 PM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't recall seeing any, but did anyone actually explain why the
market had not provided a filtering solution for Wikipedia, if there's
actually a demand for one?
(IIRC the
Am 16.06.2012 23:36, schrieb Tom Morris:
On Saturday, 16 June 2012 at 20:21, Tobias Oelgarte wrote:
That means they already found a solution to their problem that includes
the whole web at once. As you might have noticed it isn't perfect. I
guess that it could be easily improved over time
Am 17.06.2012 01:21, schrieb Anthony:
I have never seen a censorware that works
flawlessly (not even china can do this right). Either it allows to much
(incomplete blacklist) or it is unnecessary limited (incomplete whitelist
producing angry mob). Additionally it has to suite the view of the
Am 14.06.2012 19:31, schrieb geni:
On 14 June 2012 18:01, David Gerarddger...@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.
It is called censorship right
Am 03.05.2012 18:49, schrieb Erik Moeller:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 9:44 AM, Dario Taraborelli
dtarabore...@wikimedia.org wrote:
MathJax [1] is now enabled site-wide as an opt-in preference. You can now see
beautifully rendered, accessible, copypasteable and standard-compliant
(MathML)
24 matches
Mail list logo
