Fae

Since I pointed out that your posting
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Village_pump&diff=253364582&oldid=253360811
linked to in your first posting on the subject used that word, your latest
email is clearly incorrect, and I think that terminates the discussion as
far as I'm concerned.

"Rogol"

On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 9:59 PM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Rogol, it's worth repeating that the only one here talking about
> fraudulent conduct is yourself.
>
> I'll pass on repeating it again. What I originally posted is obviously
> not getting read.
>
> Thanks,
> Fae
>
> On 28 July 2017 at 21:49, Rogol Domedonfors <domedonf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Fae,
> >
> > That single sentence does not express "the issue" as I am sure you are
> well
> > aware.  I imagine it does not entirely capture your views on this complex
> > subject either.  So it is not really very helpful.
> >
> > Chris Keating's email depicts the likely course of events better than
> your
> > over-excited claims of "fraudulent" conduct and it would be wise to
> > actually find out what the BM's stance is before criticising it, or
> calling
> > for social media campaigns to change it.
> >
> > "Rogol"
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 9:36 PM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 28 July 2017 at 21:29, Rogol Domedonfors <domedonf...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> > Fae
> >> >
> >> > When you use the headline "Copyfraud by the British Museum" (to
> describe
> >> > the actions of some other organisation) and link to a discussion ([5]
> on
> >> > your list) where you used the phrase "fraudulent copyright claim"
> >> > twice,there is no other reasonable interpretation of your words than
> to
> >> > understand that you are accusing the BM of fraudulent conduct.  That
> is
> >> not
> >> > a sensible basis for a serious discussion and I for one would not
> waste
> >> my
> >> > rime getting involved with it: indeed I do not support your
> accusation in
> >> > the slightest.
> >> >
> >> > You state that as a charity the BM "must avoid copyfraud in any
> >> > circumstances".
> >> > Since you are using that word to cover, broadly speaking, any action
> to
> >> > claim or protect intellectual property rights that you don't like,
> they
> >> > clearly do not have any duty to behave exactly as you personally might
> >> > happen to prefer.  The question of harmonising intellectual property
> >> rights
> >> > across various jurisdictions, the interaction between ownership of
> >> physical
> >> > objects and their artisitic and photographic representations, the
> legal
> >> > duties of charity trustees to achieve their charitable aims and their
> >> duty
> >> > to maintain their ability to execute those aims, and all the other
> >> elements
> >> > of this discussion deserve more than a causally dismissive "I'm not
> going
> >> > to write an essay".  If you can't be bothered to explain your
> position, I
> >> > can't be bothered to support it.
> >> >
> >> > If you really think your attitude of "I'm right, everyone else is
> wrong,
> >> > and I'm not going to bother to be polite to people who don't do what I
> >> want
> >> > the instant I demand it" is going to achieve anything practical, then
> I
> >> am
> >> > not going to waste my time helping you to waste the time of people who
> >> have
> >> > a job to do, which is rather more demanding, rather more worthwhile
> and
> >> > rather less well paid than you choose to believe.
> >>
> >> Nobody believes that claiming copyright on 2,000 year old works is
> >> something that a British National Institution would want to defend.
> >> The issue is expressed in that one sentence, an essay is really not
> >> needed to explain it. So "I'm right, everyone else is wrong" does not
> >> describe what this is about.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Fae
> >>
> >> > "Rogol"
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 7:43 PM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hi Rogol, thanks for your interest. I do not understand your reading
> >> >> of my words. However when I wrote "the restrictions are
> >> >> shockingly obvious cases of copyfraud" or "apparent ignorance over
> >> >> copyright", neither can be interpreted as an accusation of fraudulent
> >> >> conduct by anyone. If there is confusion about the word, I suggest
> >> >> reading the Wikipedia article, it's quite interesting.[1]
> >> >>
> >> >> As for a reasoned case, I found the board level approved words on the
> >> >> official website, describing why the British Museum exists (see my
> >> >> original email), to be adequate enough to expect that their policies
> >> >> and their implementation of policy must avoid copyfraud in any
> >> >> circumstances. I'm not going to write an essay about something this
> >> >> obvious, nor do I expect to have to doublethink myself into giving
> >> >> positive reasons for a notice on an ancient artefact that claims it
> is
> >> >> under copyright, just to potentially make a few middle-managers in
> the
> >> >> administration of the two museums involved feel good about
> themselves.
> >> >> They are probably paid well enough not to worry about my plain words,
> >> >> or my simple-minded approach, failing to be politically diplomatic.
> >> >>
> >> >> As previously stated, I'd be only too happy for the BM or the THM to
> >> >> get in touch. I'm even happy to have a chat over the phone as part of
> >> >> taking steps to ensure that this exhibition is fixed, and cannot
> >> >> reoccur in the display of future loans.
> >> >>
> >> >> Links
> >> >> 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyfraud
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> Fae
> >> >> --
> >> >> Fae
> >> >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/LGBT+
> >> >> http://telegram.me/wmlgbt
> >> >>
> >> >> On 28 Jul 2017 19:09, "Rogol Domedonfors" <domedonf...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Fae,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I do know some people at the BM but I'm not going to waste their
> or my
> >> >> time
> >> >> > on claims that start off by accusing them of "fraudlent" conduct
> and
> >> >> finish
> >> >> > with demands that they immediately reverse their policies, just
> >> because
> >> >> you
> >> >> > say so.  If you were able to put together a reasoned case which
> showed
> >> >> that
> >> >> > you were aware of the positive and negative sides of their and your
> >> >> > positions, I might reconsider -- but to be honest, I'm not going
> to.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "Rogol"
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 1:02 PM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > The Tullie House Museum in Carlisle has a number of objects on
> loan
> >> >> > > from the British Museum,[3] and it appears that it is only those
> >> >> > > objects that have any restrictions on photography. I took
> >> photographs
> >> >> > > of two of these (without any flash), as the restrictions are
> >> >> > > shockingly obvious cases of copyfraud, and not for any reason
> that
> >> >> > > might protect the works from damage.[1][2] It seems
> incomprehensible
> >> >> > > as to why the British Museum would ever want to make copyright
> >> claims
> >> >> > > over ~2,000 year old works especially considering they are not a
> >> >> > > money-making commercial enterprise, but a National institute and
> >> >> > > charity, with a stated objective[4] that "the collection should
> be
> >> put
> >> >> > > to public use and be freely accessible".
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Does anyone have any ideas for action, or contacts in the Museum,
> >> that
> >> >> > > might result in a change of how loans from the BM are controlled?
> >> I'm
> >> >> > > wondering if the most effective way forward is to make some
> social
> >> >> > > media fuss, to ensure the Trustees of the museum pay attention.
> The
> >> >> > > reputational risk the apparent ignorance over copyright by the BM
> >> >> > > loans management team seems something that would be easy to
> correct,
> >> >> > > so changes to policy are overdue. My own experience of polite
> >> private
> >> >> > > letters to a Museum's lawyer demonstrates that you may as well
> save
> >> >> > > hours of volunteer time by filing these in the bin, compared to
> the
> >> >> > > sometimes highly effective use of a few pointed tweets written
> in a
> >> >> > > few minutes and shared publicly and widely across social media.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Those of us Wikimedians who work closely with GLAMs tend to shy
> away
> >> >> > > from any controversy, wanting the organizations to move towards
> >> >> > > sharing our open knowledge goals for positive reasons. I'm happy
> to
> >> >> > > try those types of collegiate ways of partnering, however
> drawing a
> >> >> > > few lines in the sand by highlighting embarrassing case studies,
> >> might
> >> >> > > mean we make timely progress while activist dinosaurs like me are
> >> >> > > still alive to see it happen.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Links
> >> >> > > 1. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:British_Museum_2nd_
> >> >> > > century_bronze_jug,_with_copyfraud_notice.jpg
> >> >> > > 2. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:British_Museum_
> >> >> > > Fortuna_statue,_with_copyfraud_notice.jpg
> >> >> > > 3. Tullie House, Roman Frontier exhibition:
> >> >> > > http://web.archive.org/web/20161030151228/www.
> >> >> tulliehouse.co.uk/galleries-
> >> >> > > collections/galleries/roman-frontier-gallery
> >> >> > > 4. British Museum "about us":
> >> >> > > http://web.archive.org/web/20170714042800/www.
> >> >> britishmuseum.org/about_us/
> >> >> > > management/about_us.aspx
> >> >> > > 5. Commons village pump discussion:
> >> >> > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#
> >> >> > > British_Museum_and_blatant_copyfraud
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Contacts
> >> >> > > * https://twitter.com/britishmuseum
> >> >> > > * https://twitter.com/TullieHouse
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Thanks,
> >> >> > > Fae
> >> >> > > --
> >> >> > > fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> >> >>
> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >> >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >> >> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> >> >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >> >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >> >>
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> >> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> ,
> >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >>
> >> --
> >> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
> --
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> Personal and confidential, please do not circulate or re-quote.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to