not necessarily that people go to Wikipedia
That just doesn't strike me as true, but I guess I don't know the
evidence.
Kimberlee Weatherall
From: wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of private
musings
Sent: Friday, 23 January 2009 7
Aren't there a couple of different issues going on here - on the one
hand, ability to speak for the chapter, say, on chapter type issues, and
on the other hand, ability to speak about Wikipedia/Wikimedia? Maybe,
Angela, you'd be comfortable talking about Wikipedia/Wikimedia from an
informed
Rather negative Wikipedia story in The Australian higher education
supplement (page 1, also here:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25037270-12332,00.htm
l).
Kim
Kimberlee Weatherall
Senior Lecturer
TC Beirne School of Law
The University of Queensland
St Lucia
. However, when such cases have been
raised in the UK they have been based on 'extensive work' getting the
photograph to faithfully reflect the original. We haven't had that case come to
court in Australia; reasoning in IceTV suggests it may not hold up here
(anymore).
Kimberlee Weatherall
Worth noting that both EFA and GetUp are coordinating on this issue: so
Wikimedians who in their personal capacity are interested in getting
involved in the campaign against such laws should get in touch with one
of those organisations...and watch for more.
Heh. Yes,even drafting guidelines seems to be a bit 'all too hard',
given that we still only have *draft* guidelines from all those urgent
criminal copyright reforms done in 2006 :)
-Original Message-
From: wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
