On 01/01/2014 11:33, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi,
What effective claim has been made against Kim Dotcom and, THAT is your
argument.
Thanks,
GerardM
The claim is that knowing that items were copyright violations, they
waited until a DMCA takedown came in before removing a link. Additional
Well not to get into a whole seperate discussion; but from emails recovered
by prosecutors it seems they knowingly violated the safe harbour provisions
by claiming to copyright holders that they had no access to raw files, when
in fact they did.
Actually, that context does have relevance. To what
Hoi,
What effective claim has been made against Kim Dotcom and, THAT is your
argument.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 1 January 2014 12:21, ??? wrote:
> On 01/01/2014 07:41, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>
>> Hoi,
>> When you go the way of comparing to Kim Dotcom to make a point, you will
>> have to recognise
On 01/01/2014 07:41, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi,
When you go the way of comparing to Kim Dotcom to make a point, you will
have to recognise that the government has been shown to act illegally.
Consequently your argument is without real merit.
Thanks,
GerardM
The first thing that is wro
Hoi,
When you go the way of comparing to Kim Dotcom to make a point, you will
have to recognise that the government has been shown to act illegally.
Consequently your argument is without real merit.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 31 December 2013 20:45, ??? wrote:
> On 31/12/2013 15:01, Yann Forget wr
On 31/12/2013 15:01, Yann Forget wrote:
2013/12/31 ???
Isn't that the attitude that got Kim Dotcom into trouble?
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/12/us-unveils-the-
case-against-kim-dotcom-revealing-e-mails-and-financial-data/
This is a typical trolling. Comparing Megaupload with Wi
2013/12/31 ???
>
>
> Isn't that the attitude that got Kim Dotcom into trouble?
> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/12/us-unveils-the-
> case-against-kim-dotcom-revealing-e-mails-and-financial-data/
This is a typical trolling. Comparing Megaupload with Wikimedia Commons?
Don't you have bett
On 30/12/2013 09:59, Yann Forget wrote:
Hi,
2013/12/30 Samuel Klein
On Dec 29, 2013 5:51 PM, "Fæ" wrote:
On 29 Dec 2013 22:43, "Klaus Graf" wrote:
I think it would be the best if _all_ URAA affected files would be kept
until a DMCA take down notice.
Your proposal would be more useful
Yes, I am working on this now, and will put up a proposal to amend policy on
Commons in the next day or two. It is of particular relevance to UK Crown
Copyright works.
Michael
On 30 Dec 2013, at 14:56, Fæ wrote:
> The URAA is rather more than theoretical. There is more milage in
> developi
2013/12/30 Newyorkbrad :
> I have no role or participation on Commons, but from my work on English WP
> I'm aware of the very real copyright status of "free as a practical matter
> although someone could theoretically make a disputed technical argument
> otherwise."
>
> One solution, where there is
On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Fæ wrote:
> The URAA is rather more than theoretical. There is more milage in
> developing a defensive approach for orphan works. Again I think an
> inclusive discussion on Commons is more useful if anyone intends to
> progress this.
>
> Fae
I'm finding it inte
The URAA is rather more than theoretical. There is more milage in
developing a defensive approach for orphan works. Again I think an
inclusive discussion on Commons is more useful if anyone intends to
progress this.
Fae
On 30 Dec 2013 14:04, "Newyorkbrad" wrote:
> I have no role or participatio
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
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?
No, as the only part where I expressed my opinion was the assumption
that Klaus suggested we only d
I have no role or participation on Commons, but from my work on English WP
I'm aware of the very real copyright status of "free as a practical matter
although someone could theoretically make a disputed technical argument
otherwise."
One solution, where there is a good-faith argument the image is
If anyone wants to suggest useful changes to Commons guidelines, then this
is a discussion to hold on Commons.
I suspect only a handful of us read this list, and only a few of us have
handled or discussed real URAA cases.
Fae
___
Wikimedia-l mailing lis
2013/12/30 geni
> On 30 December 2013 11:26, Gerard Meijssen >wrote:
>
> > 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 a
On 30 December 2013 11:26, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> 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
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 d
Yann Forget wrote:
Are you suggesting that we can keep URAA affected data until we get a
takedown notice?
He is suggesting that, but apparently without realizing that his
proposal stands in direct contradiction to our precautionary principle
(COM:PRP) and to the way Commons cares about its r
Hi,
2013/12/30 Samuel Klein
> On Dec 29, 2013 5:51 PM, "Fæ" wrote:
> >
> > On 29 Dec 2013 22:43, "Klaus Graf" wrote:
> > >
> > > I think it would be the best if _all_ URAA affected files would be kept
> > > until a DMCA take down notice.
> >
> > Your proposal would be more useful made with the
I'm sorry about your problem Klaus, however I think that you won't get
anywhere by calling people trolls.
2013/12/30 Samuel Klein
> On Dec 29, 2013 5:51 PM, "Fæ" wrote:
> >
> > On 29 Dec 2013 22:43, "Klaus Graf" wrote:
> > >
> > > I think it would be the best if _all_ URAA affected files woul
On Dec 29, 2013 5:51 PM, "Fæ" wrote:
>
> On 29 Dec 2013 22:43, "Klaus Graf" wrote:
> >
> > I think it would be the best if _all_ URAA affected files would be kept
> > until a DMCA take down notice.
>
> Your proposal would be more useful made with the Commons community
Both excellent suggestions.
On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Klaus Graf wrote:
> But in the case of in the country of origin PD works which are foreign
> government works it is needed that the WMF clearly speaks out
>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikilegal/Use_of_Foreign_Works_Restored_under_the_URAA_on_Commons
<--- lik
On 29 Dec 2013 22:43, "Klaus Graf" wrote:
>
> Can nobody stop the URAA Copyright trolls mass deleting perfect fine files
> on Commons?
>
> I think it would be the best if _all_ URAA affected files would be kept
> until a DMCA take down notice.
Your proposal would be more useful made with the Comm
Can nobody stop the URAA Copyright trolls mass deleting perfect fine files
on Commons?
I think it would be the best if _all_ URAA affected files would be kept
until a DMCA take down notice.
But in the case of in the country of origin PD works which are foreign
government works it is needed that t
25 matches
Mail list logo
