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?
Rupert
Am 22.06.2014 11:22 schrieb geni geni...@gmail.com:
On 22 June 2014 08:30, Itzik Edri it...@infra.co.il wrote:
The
2014-06-22 14:29 GMT+02:00 Russavia russavia.wikipe...@gmail.com:
Craig, et al
On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Craig Franklin cfrank...@halonetwork.net
wrote:
Russavia,
I'm a bit confused though about the
parody/satire angle, my understanding is that a CC licence does not
extinguish
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
2014-06-22 18:10 GMT+02:00 Itzik Edri it...@infra.co.il:
I'm saying that in *my personal opinion* as Wikimedians, and not I'm
representing WMIL (which will continue FULLY to support the efforts on this
issue) or any other official role i'm holding: but to be honest, as the
situation looks
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
On 23 June 2014 09:48, Steffen Prößdorf steffen.proessd...@wikimedia.de wrote:
I am absolutely agree with that (also as my personal opinion).
The government allows the very free use of it, the WMF legal staff and the
BOT don't think the URAA should be used to delete photos on Commons without
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,
Hoi,
The Israeli government is clear in that they claim no copyright. A license
can only be given when you claim a copyright.
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
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
Hoi,
I disagree
They can but it makes more sense for them to change their own law first.
Thanks,
Gerard
On 23 June 2014 13:42, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:
On 23 June 2014 11:41, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi,
The Israeli government is clear in that they claim
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.
Regards
On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 11:56 AM, Craig
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 question is whether that is implicit, and whether that is necessary at
all. I find the argument that for government works we only have to bother
about the law of the source country, very persuasive.
2014-06-23 14:27 GMT+02:00 geni geni...@gmail.com:
On 23 June 2014 13:00, Ilario Valdelli
On 23 June 2014 13:42, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote:
The question is whether that is implicit, and whether that is necessary at
all. I find the argument that for government works we only have to bother
about the law of the source country, very persuasive.
I can see no point in
I think following the opinion of Carl Lindberg is the best option [1]: I
would personally be happy about not having to delete governmental works
which have expired in their own country... those always have felt different
to me than privately-held copyrights.
Hope Fae will support me when I start
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. And not surprising, he was deleted from Commoms by the same
person who deleted all the photos so far:
Well I am not an admin, but as on all other projects, you must play by the
rules. I noticed the deletion notice for your letter claimed it was a
derivative work, implying that the file was uploaded as artwork. It
either included a logo letterhead that has not previously been uploaded
(see [1]) or
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
Pardon me if this has already been covered, but as I understand it the
problem is not the legal status of the files in Israel, the problem is with
the legal status of the files in the United States, where the Israeli
Government may still have some copyright protections. So while the
contents of
So you want them to have a letter You are allowed to use these images that
you are allowed to use but if the letter says that the reason that they're
allowed to use it is that they are allowed to use it, it is not valid.
Shouldn't we be welcoming free content rather than inventing far out
reasons
It is a bit crazy :-) The use to be copyright holder of these files is
Israeli goverment. But according to the goverment it does not claim
any copyrights as it clearly stated that the these files are not
copyrightable, and it is no longer copyright holder. One can have an
assumption that next
Craig, et al
On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Craig Franklin
cfrank...@halonetwork.net wrote:
Pardon me if this has already been covered, but as I understand it the
problem is not the legal status of the files in Israel, the problem is with
the legal status of the files in the United States,
Itzik
On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 3:30 PM, 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. And not surprising, he was deleted
I'm uncertain why CC-0 would be more beneficial than a statement that the
government believes the photos to be in the public domain. The main
difference I see is that a release is active, which might be out of the
power of the civil servant, the statement is a matter of fact and thus
passive.
Russavia,
I am aware that that is the issue (and I was talking about the original
problem images, not this letter). I'm a bit confused though about the
parody/satire angle, my understanding is that a CC licence does not
extinguish things such as moral rights that are not related to copyright.
On 22 June 2014 12:08, Craig Franklin cfrank...@halonetwork.net wrote:
...
parody/satire angle, my understanding is that a CC licence does not
extinguish things such as moral rights that are not related to copyright.
This is fundamentally misleading. Please refer to
https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A7%D7%95%D7%91%D7%A5:%D7%AA%D7%92%D7%95%D7%91%D7%AA_%D7%9E%D7%A9%D7%A8%D7%93_%D7%94%D7%9E%D7%A9%D7%A4%D7%98%D7%99%D7%9D_%D7%91%D7%A2%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%99%D7%9F_%D7%96%D7%9B%D7%95%D7%99%D7%95%D7%AA_%D7%99%D7%95%D7%A6%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%9D.jpg
Such a statement from GOI
With all the good faith, and even with the good connections of WMIL with
the Israeli government - lets don't forget this it is still, a government,
and it is not kind of lets ask them and they will do it just because we
are Wikimedia Commons issue. It was hard enough to explain them the
ridiculous
Hi,
2014-06-22 16:00 GMT+05:30 Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com:
It is a bit crazy :-) The use to be copyright holder of these files is
Israeli goverment. But according to the goverment it does not claim
any copyrights as it clearly stated that the these files are not
copyrightable, and it
Craig, et al
On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Craig Franklin cfrank...@halonetwork.net
wrote:
Russavia,
I'm a bit confused though about the
parody/satire angle, my understanding is that a CC licence does not
extinguish things such as moral rights that are not related to copyright.
Sorry,
On 22/06/2014 17:10, Itzik Edri wrote:
Many people
are already using the photos on websites, Flickrs accounts and others
photos services
They had better not be using them on flickr accounts as flickr may
delete the entire account, for infringing the flickr and Y! TC. The
issue being that
31 matches
Mail list logo
