Re: [Wikimediaau-l] relavent to GLAM

2009-07-11 Thread David Gerard
On 11/07/2009, Andrew orderinchao...@gmail.com wrote: Agreed with Gnangarra - I think if we approach them on agreeable terms and recognise that they have needs too that need to be factored in, and that we can fill them in on what we need and work out how that can be accommodated as well, then

[Wikimediaau-l] relavent to GLAM

2009-07-10 Thread private musings
This is rather important + serious stuff which relates to the 'GLAM' sector - hopefully we'll be leading the way in ensuring good communication may help resolve problems like this; (basically a Commons user has received a legal letter relating to uploads of photographs of gallery items)

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] relavent to GLAM

2009-07-10 Thread David Gerard
On 11/07/2009, private musings thepmacco...@gmail.com wrote: This is rather important + serious stuff which relates to the 'GLAM' sector - hopefully we'll be leading the way in ensuring good communication may help resolve problems like this; (basically a Commons user has received a legal

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] relavent to GLAM

2009-07-10 Thread private musings
well just for the record, I hope we can do better than referring to an action clearly intended (however misguided) to protect the work of a rather venerable cultural institution as 'batshit insane' :-) - I rather think it runs the risk of making us seem a bit radical and unfriendly - not my

Re: [Wikimediaau-l] relavent to GLAM

2009-07-10 Thread Gnangarra
Opening communication between the Australian Institutions and wiki world is what GLAM is for, at the extreme if such an issue was to arise with an Australian Institution we would be able to resolve the concerns without legal threats. GLAM is about us working together and understand each others