Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Potential lobbying by CIS on their own FDC proposal
Hari Prasad Nadig hpna...@gmail.com [2014-05-21 07:48:46 +0530]:
I strongly object to the attitude that you (and Gautham as well, perhaps to
the same extent, on Twitter[1]) have shown in your comments when taking on
the strong opposition by community members to CIS's proposal. Whatever your
affiliations may be, this is no way of treating community members - whether
you recognize yourself to be part of it or not.
Could you point me to one instance where I have actually treated a
community member unfairly and impolitely? Would you have even a
*single* instance of firm proof rather than mere insinuations of a bad
attitude?
I further take *strong objection* to the words like “Don’t wrestle with
pigs:... or comparison to the Dog in the Manger story even if it serves
as metaphor for your perspective.
A. Could you please indicate where I have used the words you have put in
quotes?
B. I don't understand what you are taking strong objection to.
B1. Do you strongly object to people believing that trolling is bad?
Do you honestly believe that viewing trolling as a bad thing is in
itself objectionable?
B2. Or do you strongly object to people believing that some of this
e-mails on this list are trollish? Do you believe that every mail on
this list is helpful? If you do feel there are only good and
substantive contributions to this list, then I have a fundamentally
different viewpoint and we will have to disagree.
B2. Or do you strongly object to metaphors?
This doesn't seem to be the case, since I used a quote by
Nietzsche which contained a metaphor.
B3. Or do you strongly object to metaphors involving animals of a
species other than homo sapiens sapiens? Do you believe that Aesop's
fables and the Jataka tales shouldn't ever be looked upon as lessons
about the human condition?
B4. Or do you strongly object to those who hold viewpoints contrary
to yours?
Given what you've stated, I'm unable to say which of B{1-4} is the basis
of your strong objection.
I fail to understand the animosity and hostility being shown towards
community members who're speaking out even if they're quite vocal about it.
Some of these people have dedicated years of their lives to Wikimedia
without expecting anything in return and continue to do so.
If you stepped in to curb those who *actually* display animosity and
hostility on this mailing list, rather than directing your attention
solely on my respectful mail, perhaps this e-mail would elicit greater
respect from me.
Treat community members with respect. The lengthy rants shall then stand to
get more respect and not otherwise.
I take the strongest objection to your characterisation of my measured
response as a rant. Demeaning the courteous writing of a fellow
community-member and dismissing it as a rant[1] is no way to
positively engage.
[1]: Various definitions of rant include: wild or impassioned
speech; to talk loudly and in a way that shows anger: to complain in a
way that is unreasonable; a tirade or a diatribe.
I also take the strongest objection to any characterisation of my
treatment of fellow community members as disrespectful in any manner.
There is not a iota of truth in that allegation.
It is quite unsettling to hear that the anonymous id created just for the
comments for FDC proposal on meta is yours. Like Ravi rightly pointed out,
you should have either used your existing account to comment or made your
affiliations clear before adding your comments there. You may just have
ended up influencing the FDC review in an unethical way by doing so.
A. I take the strongest objection to your statement that I may have
influenced the FDC review in an unethical manner. You have made that
comment in a flippant manner with not a shred of evidence to to back it
up; it is nothing but rank libel.
B. I cannot use a unified account or merge accounts, since there is
another Wikipedia user (the DE Wikipedia, IIRC) who created his account
before I did. If you know of a way I can, please do let me know. I
would love to claim the same username across all Wikimedia portals.
C. Thank you for questioning my ethics alone for being anonymous and
excluding:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/AdvisoryParty
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Teri_Pettit
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/DiggyBaby
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Seekingfbi
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/OhHellYeahYes!
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Chaukalagaya
Two hurrahs for neutrality!
Lastly, I agree strongly with Ravi: Let us focus on real issues. In
that spirit, I am no longer going to continue contributing to this
thread, which only detracts from the signal-to-noise ratio. This thread
is an exemplar of what I noted is my original response on this thread as
my misguided hope.
--
Pranesh Prakash
Access to Knowledge Fellow, Information
Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Potential lobbying by CIS on their own FDC proposal
editors being bullies. Women tend to take their marbles and go home instead of putting a lot of effort into something where they get slapped around. I work on biographies of obscure women writers, rather under the radar stuff… contribute to more prominent articles makes one paranoid, anyone can come along and undo your work and leave nasty messages and you get very little oversight.” [12] “I used to contribute to Wikipedia, but finally quit because I grew tired of the “king of the mountain” attitude they have. You work your tail off on an entry for several YEARS only to have some pimply faced college kid knock it off by putting all manner of crazy stuff on there such as need for “reliable” sources when if they’d taken a moment to actually look at the reference they’d see they were perfectly reliable! I’m done with Wikipedia. It’s not only sexist but agist as well.” [13] [7] Source: Cristen Conger, Discovery News, Is There a Gender Gap Online [8] Source: From a discussion at Pandagon titled Chronicling the Abuses [9] Source: From a discussion at Metafilter titled Wikipedia, Snips Snails, Sugar Spice? [10] Source: Commenter, Feministing, Quick Hit: Only 13% of Wikipedia Contributors Are Women [11] Source: Justine Cassell, New York Times, Editing Wars Behind the Scenes [12] Source: A commenter named Joyce at the NPR blog, commenting on the Eyder Peralta post Facing Serious Gender Gap, Wikipedia Vows To Add More Women Contributors [13] Source: A commenter named Sabrina at the NPR blog, commenting on the Eyder Peralta post Facing Serious Gender Gap, Wikipedia Vows To Add More Women Contributors Research presented in Wikimania 2013 by Netha Hussain, Jadine Lannon, and others on the gender gap in the Indian Wikipedia provides further evidence in this regard. So let us focus on the real issues instead of viewing the community with the following attitude. One person maketh not the community and the community cannot be reduced to one person. Please do not expand the objections I took to one instance of one person's engagement as applying to the whole community. I do also believe that one should not feed the trolls nor engage with trollish behaviour (the latter can be exhibited even by people who aren't trolls per se). I agree with you: let us focus on the real issues. -- Pranesh Prakash Access to Knowledge Fellow, Information Society Project, Yale Law School M: +1 520 314 7147 | W: http://yaleisp.org --- Policy Director, Centre for Internet and Society T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: https://twitter.com/pranesh_prakash signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Potential lobbying by CIS on their own FDC proposal
on this list have their judgment so obscured by petty politicking that they see a question by me — as to whether Wikimedia should stop its funding activities (because that would give rise, if one goes by the averments by many people on this list, to issues of paid editing) — as a call to stop all funding to the Wikimedia India Chapter? To that, I would resolutely say, No. As a strong believer in Wikipedia and the power of open collaborative communities, I greatly regret the state of affairs that exists currently within the Wikimedia India community. And unlike others, I wouldn't put the blame solely at CIS's feet. Nor will I give in to the convenient temptation to pin the blame solely on the trolls within the community — who most decidedly do exist. The truth is more complicated than such simplistic blame assignments. I do hope the community — of which several of the staff in CIS, myself included, are a part — finds itself able to be more productive in its discussions. But then, as Nietzsche observed, hope prolongs the torments of man. Regards, Pranesh ravidreams at gmail.com (Ravishankar) [2014-05-17 16:20:58 +0530]: Hi Vishnu, Could you please clarify if the following user account https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/The-solipsist belongs to a CIS employee named Pranesh Prakash http://cis-india.org/about/people/our-team The very unique user ID Solipsist is seen to be coinciding with his gmail address used at http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law_mail.sarai.net/2007-February.txt He is also suggesting in Twitter that WMIN funding be stopped. https://twitter.com/pranesh_prakash/status/467385778268418048 Ravi -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaindia-l/attachments/20140517/d827efc1/attachment.html - -- Pranesh Prakash Access to Knowledge Fellow, Information Society Project, Yale Law School M: +1 520 314 7147 | W: http://yaleisp.org - --- Policy Director, Centre for Internet and Society T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: https://twitter.com/pranesh_prakash -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJTeSyiAAoJEFUPonS5l6Cp1VoP/Rm200rx6uIPwGunXw9Mywko sdVmO/zPa4J/aU/Vd2CTR37yLjtRmKdrMfjN54hC+sluaj3igIlHvmrAjSjOhhJe +roK26FUpEOw+dq1iYeg5gapg0J+7NIdjjklbqv77gXmE+lwS1yZCZg1nBd8TcWA QAPAtzkWCiSD1OxdSwwCZSlrrg0bguxy7cu8PT7pXkdimMn3Ihj0C+wFbcSIVx1x Jo8R4bGh+0y4v5ybFRsI+1CdpLArij1SeXeaDrp59z+ykjICMeK8xR4XdgLLSsc9 hB5J20T7JVHTjxh1a3nUiAdZ9TQrafCxlfg0peh2HQmoDbE4QgEHh0/SBB4WeMrA waR/AQg5EOFJ/BvwTBUDLzhPJ+74FDC5sJyhyzgn23GO5VJVpiqj3YXWjTppJfJj macgGFbkIZ0WUB8CAtFwsGPLUrTuYVC8bE8BSPRI4i22fbkh5DAeJ7SYWa/duP2Q MHAxw4A0/1FRHLMPwJABVnfAR94ke1t/tBgPCV1alRayi9l0cn4/KXYe0LwFP590 TAX6xho47mGE81Vskdhn7S9T6qP+D4QbROvFJ/mG3ihTzGbmFtuPdRGQllpFpsH2 mO4h4GZ4RwBzmpTvm8q/uVBaPDmb09toWWSktblPdDsfSFhIq3hykYSvOxLBBcH4 vGK/5U1j+S/FooyfwJ5Y =yrV0 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Act Now to Protect the Public Domain
On Sep 2, 2011 3:42 PM, the.solips...@gmail.com wrote: Rajya Sabha got adjourned early today, and this is now due to be taken up on Monday. Please spread this! Thanks. -- Sent from my phone On Sep 2, 2011 1:40 PM, Pradeep Mohandas pradeep.mohan...@gmail.com wrote: hi, Today (Sept 2, for those who read this later) was a Friday. Was the bill discussed in the Rajya Sabha today? If so, any updates on what happened? Thanks, Pradeep Sent from my Nokia E63 On 02/09/2011, Pranesh Prakash pran...@cis-india.org wrote: Dear all, On Friday the Rajya Sabha is due to debate the Copyright Amendment Bill, which (amongst many things) increases term of copyright in photographs from 60 years from publication of the photo to 60 years after death of the photographer (while the international standard is 25 years from publication). Please oppose this by e-mailing your Rajya Sabha representative: http://goo.gl/6CMXC I apologize for the horrible formatting of that selection form (which should get fixed soon to ensure that your states' RS MPs alone are shown). Since time is of the essence, we decided to go ahead any way. Regards, Pranesh -- Pranesh Prakash Programme Manager Centre for Internet and Society W: http://cis-india.org | T: +91 80 40926283 -- Pradeep Mohandas How Pradeep uses email - http://goo.gl/6v1I9 ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Act Now to Protect the Public Domain
On Sep 2, 2011 3:41 PM, Pranesh Prakash the.solips...@gmail.com wrote: The Berne Convention and the TRIPS Agreement (which incorporates the Berne Convention), which is the most-ratified international instrument on copyright, pegs the term at 25 years for photographs. One should remember that originally photographs, being mechanical capture of an existing image, wasn't even granted any copyright. It wasn't seen as being a truly creative activity, unlike creating music or writing * literature*! -- Sent from my phone On Sep 2, 2011 2:12 PM, CherianTinu Abraham tinucher...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you Pranesh for sharing this. This interests the Wikimedians , many of us regularly uploads copyright expired images to Wikimedia Commons. I have also supported the petition. But do you really think the international standard is 25 years ? I really doubt ! -TC On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Gautam John gau...@prathambooks.org wrote: Thank you, Pranesh. I hope you will consider supporting this petition. Best, Gautam http://blog.prathambooks.org/p/social-media.html On 2 September 2011 04:49, Pranesh Prakash pran...@cis-india.org wrote: Dear all, On Friday the Rajya Sabha is due to debate the Copyright Amendment Bill, which (amongst many things) increases term of copyright in photographs from 60 years from publication of the photo to 60 years after death of the photographer (while the international standard is 25 years from publication). Please oppose this by e-mailing your Rajya Sabha representative: http://goo.gl/6CMXC I apologize for the horrible formatting of that selection form (which should get fixed soon to ensure that your states' RS MPs alone are shown). Since time is of the essence, we decided to go ahead any way. Regards, Pranesh -- Pranesh Prakash Programme Manager Centre for Internet and Society W: http://cis-india.org | T: +91 80 40926283 ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
[Wikimediaindia-l] Act Now to Protect the Public Domain
Dear all, On Friday the Rajya Sabha is due to debate the Copyright Amendment Bill, which (amongst many things) increases term of copyright in photographs from 60 years from publication of the photo to 60 years after death of the photographer (while the international standard is 25 years from publication). Please oppose this by e-mailing your Rajya Sabha representative: http://goo.gl/6CMXC I apologize for the horrible formatting of that selection form (which should get fixed soon to ensure that your states' RS MPs alone are shown). Since time is of the essence, we decided to go ahead any way. Regards, Pranesh -- Pranesh Prakash Programme Manager Centre for Internet and Society W: http://cis-india.org | T: +91 80 40926283 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] National Museum, New Delhi
On Wednesday 29 June 2011 03:16 PM, Gautam John wrote: Very much! A picture of the Mona Lisa is copyrightable. Even if the painting of the Mona Lisa is out of copyright. I normally would hold that this is so, and have done so for years. However, given the recent interpretations by the Delhi High Court of the Supreme Court decision in EBC v. Modak, I'm not so sure any more. I think it is now arguable that a plain photograph that is meant to merely be a representation of the underlying painting is not original, lacking skill and judgment (or modicum of creativity, based on which test you believe EBC v. Modak lays down as the test for 'originality').[1] I doubt any court would grant a scanner copyright over unedited scans. Regards, Pranesh [1]: While it is not arguable whether EBC v. Modak (INSC) lays down exercise of skill and judgment as the test for originality or modicum of creativity, it is very clear that it squarely rejects the older sweat of the brow test. -- Pranesh Prakash Programme Manager Centre for Internet and Society W: http://cis-india.org | T: +91 80 40926283 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] National Museum, New Delhi
On Wednesday 29 June 2011 03:20 PM, Vickram Crishna wrote: It's an interesting point. A photograph of a piece of art or heritage cannot logically* claim copyright, but what about a picture of a friend standing in front of said piece of art/heritage? That is, undoubtedly, copyrightable (and hence, copyrighted as per our law). -- Pranesh Prakash Programme Manager Centre for Internet and Society W: http://cis-india.org | T: +91 80 40926283 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
[Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for photographs
Dear all, It seems clear that through a new amendment to the Copyright Act, the term of copyright of photographs is going to be increased from 25 years (which is the minimum required by international copyright law) to 60 years *after the death of the photographer* (i.e., copyright term = life of the photographer + 60 years). So say a photographer aged 25 clicks a photograph and dies at the age of 75 (in 2061): Under current law the copyright on that photo expires on January 1, 2037. Under proposed law, copyright on that photo expires on January 1, 2122. The difference: 85 years! (I hope I've done the math correctly.) So only your great-grandchildren will be able to upload that photograph to Wikipedia. As far as I can understand, there has been no positive lobbying on this front by any photographers. No one has really asked for it. We, from the Centre for Internet and Society submitted a 'civil society submission' (with the backing of 22 organizations) which criticised this to the Standing Committee that was examining the amendment. But the chairman of that committee did not take notice. In effect, the Standing Committee heard only rightsholders (and groups, including ours, working on the exception for persons with disabilities). Are people on this list concerned about this? If yes, then we all need to try to get this particular amendment targetted and struck off when the amendment gets presented before Parliament in the Monsoon session. Regards, Pranesh -- Pranesh Prakash Programme Manager Centre for Internet and Society W: http://cis-india.org | T: +91 80 40926283 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for photographs
Dear all, I am well aware that there are other issues such as that of copyright over works by the government and public undertakings. We have raised this issue in our analysis[1] as well as our formal submission to the Parliamentary Standing Committee.[2] However, it is one thing to get something that is good (broad exception for government works / or even better: making government works public domain) which is not even on the table, and preventing an impending harm: decrease of the public domain in terms of Indian photographs. The first is a longer term goal than the second. Copyright term of photographs is going to increase if folks don't stand up against it. Regards, Pranesh [1]: Analysis: http://goo.gl/Iv69r [2]: Civil Society submission: http://goo.gl/9Ws3E / Analysis of Standing Committee's report: http://goo.gl/Fs5WM On Saturday 18 June 2011 06:40 PM, wheredevelsd...@hotmail.com wrote: Very contentious issue Pranesh. The issue is not only this - but also to insure that any Indian government works be in public domain as well as that of a Public Servant when on duty (like in the US - after all it is OUR govenment and OUR money spent hiring that Public Servant!). Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 18:04:07 +0200 From: pran...@cis-india.org To: wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org CC: aprabh...@gmail.com; su...@cis-india.org Subject: [Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for photographs Dear all, It seems clear that through a new amendment to the Copyright Act, the term of copyright of photographs is going to be increased from 25 years (which is the minimum required by international copyright law) to 60 years *after the death of the photographer* (i.e., copyright term = life of the photographer + 60 years). So say a photographer aged 25 clicks a photograph and dies at the age of 75 (in 2061): Under current law the copyright on that photo expires on January 1, 2037. Under proposed law, copyright on that photo expires on January 1, 2122. The difference: 85 years! (I hope I've done the math correctly.) So only your great-grandchildren will be able to upload that photograph to Wikipedia. As far as I can understand, there has been no positive lobbying on this front by any photographers. No one has really asked for it. We, from the Centre for Internet and Society submitted a 'civil society submission' (with the backing of 22 organizations) which criticised this to the Standing Committee that was examining the amendment. But the chairman of that committee did not take notice. In effect, the Standing Committee heard only rightsholders (and groups, including ours, working on the exception for persons with disabilities). Are people on this list concerned about this? If yes, then we all need to try to get this particular amendment targetted and struck off when the amendment gets presented before Parliament in the Monsoon session. Regards, Pranesh ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l -- Pranesh Prakash Programme Manager Centre for Internet and Society W: http://cis-india.org | T: +91 80 40926283 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
