Re: [Wikimedia-l] Legal status of Wikimeida lists [Was: Re: The other side of the crisis at WMFR]

[Vi to]

N00bs are usually taught "public" has nothing to do with copyright ;)

Vito

2017-11-24 15:57 GMT+01:00 Gerard Meijssen :

> Hoi,
> You deny the existence of copyright.. It being public does not mean that it
> is fair game for any and all purposes.
> Thanks,
>  GerardM
>
> On 24 November 2017 at 14:39, Vi to  wrote:
>
> > Archives are public, so, IMHO, the list is.
> >
> > Vito
> >
> > 2017-11-24 11:11 GMT+01:00 mathieu stumpf guntz <
> > psychosl...@culture-libre.org>:
> >
> > > Saluton ĉiuj,
> > >
> > > Le 23/11/2017 à 20:54, Emeric Vallespi a écrit :
> > >
> > >> I think it was important to re-explain all those points so that the
> > >> community, which is - again - unnecessarily taken as witness, is not
> > >> deceived by a scenario built from scratch.
> > >> Again, to discredit the movement by such erroneous but public
> > accusations
> > >> still shows that only personal interests and vainness matter in this
> > >> conflict with some people.
> > >>
> > >> I seize the opportunity to ask: what is the legal status of the list?
> Is
> > > it considered public?
> > >
> > > I mean, it's easy to subscribe for anyone, but you still have to
> > > subscribe. And as far as I know, accessing archives require to login.
> Now
> > > there are other website which make crawled archives publicly
> accessible,
> > > but just because some do that doesn't mean it's legal.
> > >
> > > Also I'm not aware of any license regarding posted emails, so plain
> > > copyright probably apply, minus any exception related to epistolary
> > > material that might exist.
> > >
> > > It might be interesting to make any post to our mailing list a free
> > > licensed material. I've been thinking about that as I had the idea to
> > > extensively analyse the wikidata-l mailling list and publish a side by
> > side
> > > statements and extracted keywords elements, but from a legal point of
> > view
> > > it is probably not feasible. That might be circumvented with links, or
> > > providing a software which generate the expected table from provided
> > > references, but anyway it's less practical than a straight published
> > table.
> > > Having this material published under a free license would make it far
> > more
> > > useful in any kind of study with such an extensive goal in its
> > publication.
> > >
> > > Now, switching to a free license would not make the change retroactive,
> > > but it would already cover new material. Also it should be possible to
> > > contact most posters through their email and ask permission to release
> > > their previous publications under one or more free licenses and change
> > > archive metadata accordingly.
> > >
> > > Legale,
> > > mathieu
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> > > i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Legal status of Wikimeida lists [Was: Re: The other side of the crisis at WMFR]

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
You deny the existence of copyright.. It being public does not mean that it
is fair game for any and all purposes.
Thanks,
 GerardM

On 24 November 2017 at 14:39, Vi to  wrote:

> Archives are public, so, IMHO, the list is.
>
> Vito
>
> 2017-11-24 11:11 GMT+01:00 mathieu stumpf guntz <
> psychosl...@culture-libre.org>:
>
> > Saluton ĉiuj,
> >
> > Le 23/11/2017 à 20:54, Emeric Vallespi a écrit :
> >
> >> I think it was important to re-explain all those points so that the
> >> community, which is - again - unnecessarily taken as witness, is not
> >> deceived by a scenario built from scratch.
> >> Again, to discredit the movement by such erroneous but public
> accusations
> >> still shows that only personal interests and vainness matter in this
> >> conflict with some people.
> >>
> >> I seize the opportunity to ask: what is the legal status of the list? Is
> > it considered public?
> >
> > I mean, it's easy to subscribe for anyone, but you still have to
> > subscribe. And as far as I know, accessing archives require to login. Now
> > there are other website which make crawled archives publicly accessible,
> > but just because some do that doesn't mean it's legal.
> >
> > Also I'm not aware of any license regarding posted emails, so plain
> > copyright probably apply, minus any exception related to epistolary
> > material that might exist.
> >
> > It might be interesting to make any post to our mailing list a free
> > licensed material. I've been thinking about that as I had the idea to
> > extensively analyse the wikidata-l mailling list and publish a side by
> side
> > statements and extracted keywords elements, but from a legal point of
> view
> > it is probably not feasible. That might be circumvented with links, or
> > providing a software which generate the expected table from provided
> > references, but anyway it's less practical than a straight published
> table.
> > Having this material published under a free license would make it far
> more
> > useful in any kind of study with such an extensive goal in its
> publication.
> >
> > Now, switching to a free license would not make the change retroactive,
> > but it would already cover new material. Also it should be possible to
> > contact most posters through their email and ask permission to release
> > their previous publications under one or more free licenses and change
> > archive metadata accordingly.
> >
> > Legale,
> > mathieu
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> > i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Legal status of Wikimeida lists [Was: Re: The other side of the crisis at WMFR]

[Tim Landscheidt]

mathieu stumpf guntz  wrote:

>> I think it was important to re-explain all those points so
>> that the community, which is - again - unnecessarily taken
>> as witness, is not deceived by a scenario built from
>> scratch.
>> Again, to discredit the movement by such erroneous but
>> public accusations still shows that only personal
>> interests and vainness matter in this conflict with some
>> people.

> I seize the opportunity to ask: what is the legal status of
> the list? Is it considered public?

> I mean, it's easy to subscribe for anyone, but you still
> have to subscribe. And as far as I know, accessing archives
> require to login. Now there are other website which make
> crawled archives publicly accessible, but just because some
> do that doesn't mean it's legal.

> […]

Accessing the archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/ does not
require logging in (and AFAIR never has), but even if it
did, for all practical (legal) purposes this mailing list is
a public venue, if only because anybody can subscribe to it,
thus not limiting the audience in any meaningful way.

Tim


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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Legal status of Wikimeida lists [Was: Re: The other side of the crisis at WMFR]

[Vi to]

Archives are public, so, IMHO, the list is.

Vito

2017-11-24 11:11 GMT+01:00 mathieu stumpf guntz <
psychosl...@culture-libre.org>:

> Saluton ĉiuj,
>
> Le 23/11/2017 à 20:54, Emeric Vallespi a écrit :
>
>> I think it was important to re-explain all those points so that the
>> community, which is - again - unnecessarily taken as witness, is not
>> deceived by a scenario built from scratch.
>> Again, to discredit the movement by such erroneous but public accusations
>> still shows that only personal interests and vainness matter in this
>> conflict with some people.
>>
>> I seize the opportunity to ask: what is the legal status of the list? Is
> it considered public?
>
> I mean, it's easy to subscribe for anyone, but you still have to
> subscribe. And as far as I know, accessing archives require to login. Now
> there are other website which make crawled archives publicly accessible,
> but just because some do that doesn't mean it's legal.
>
> Also I'm not aware of any license regarding posted emails, so plain
> copyright probably apply, minus any exception related to epistolary
> material that might exist.
>
> It might be interesting to make any post to our mailing list a free
> licensed material. I've been thinking about that as I had the idea to
> extensively analyse the wikidata-l mailling list and publish a side by side
> statements and extracted keywords elements, but from a legal point of view
> it is probably not feasible. That might be circumvented with links, or
> providing a software which generate the expected table from provided
> references, but anyway it's less practical than a straight published table.
> Having this material published under a free license would make it far more
> useful in any kind of study with such an extensive goal in its publication.
>
> Now, switching to a free license would not make the change retroactive,
> but it would already cover new material. Also it should be possible to
> contact most posters through their email and ask permission to release
> their previous publications under one or more free licenses and change
> archive metadata accordingly.
>
> Legale,
> mathieu
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Legal status of Wikimeida lists [Was: Re: The other side of the crisis at WMFR]

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Saluton ĉiuj,

Le 23/11/2017 à 20:54, Emeric Vallespi a écrit :

I think it was important to re-explain all those points so that the community, 
which is - again - unnecessarily taken as witness, is not deceived by a 
scenario built from scratch.
Again, to discredit the movement by such erroneous but public accusations still 
shows that only personal interests and vainness matter in this conflict with 
some people.

I seize the opportunity to ask: what is the legal status of the list? Is 
it considered public?


I mean, it's easy to subscribe for anyone, but you still have to 
subscribe. And as far as I know, accessing archives require to login. 
Now there are other website which make crawled archives publicly 
accessible, but just because some do that doesn't mean it's legal.


Also I'm not aware of any license regarding posted emails, so plain 
copyright probably apply, minus any exception related to epistolary 
material that might exist.


It might be interesting to make any post to our mailing list a free 
licensed material. I've been thinking about that as I had the idea to 
extensively analyse the wikidata-l mailling list and publish a side by 
side statements and extracted keywords elements, but from a legal point 
of view it is probably not feasible. That might be circumvented with 
links, or providing a software which generate the expected table from 
provided references, but anyway it's less practical than a straight 
published table. Having this material published under a free license 
would make it far more useful in any kind of study with such an 
extensive goal in its publication.


Now, switching to a free license would not make the change retroactive, 
but it would already cover new material. Also it should be possible to 
contact most posters through their email and ask permission to release 
their previous publications under one or more free licenses and change 
archive metadata accordingly.


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