Heh, I never really liked automatic e-mail signatures before Wikipedia. But
now I use one just to stop me signing off messages with four tildes :-)

Pete / the wub

2009/7/14 sineWAVE <sinew...@silentflame.com>

> > ~~~~
> That's worth a few wikipediholism points, I'm sure. Maybe you could
> get a greasemonkey script to convert wikimarkup on non-wiki sites to
> appropriate formatting. That'd be cool.
> >
> > --- On Sun, 12/7/09, Peter Coombe <thewub.w...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> From: Peter Coombe <thewub.w...@googlemail.com>
> >> Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] [Foundation-l] "sue and be damned" FOI to
> NPG
> >> To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Date: Sunday, 12 July, 2009, 11:18 AM
> >> But even if FOI is deemed to apply to
> >> photographs of artwork, they could release the files and
> >> still maintain their claim of copyright
> >> http://www.dca.gov.uk/foi/yourRights/index.htm#receive
> >>
> >>
> >> They could also claim commercial interest (IMO reasonably)
> >> as a reason not to comply with such a FOI request, but this
> >> is at least tested against the public interest.
> >> http://www.dca.gov.uk/foi/yourRights/exemptions.htm#43
> >>
> >>
> >> Pete / the wub
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2009/7/12 Dahsun <dah...@yahoo.com>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I agree that the WMUK shouldn't get directly involved,
> >> but if without making any reference to the case in hand they
> >> request the same information under the FOI then I would have
> >> thought they were indirectly rather than directly involved.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> As for whether the FOI has an exemption for artwork, well
> >> I'd be interested in what the lawyers have to say on
> >> this as there is some legalese in the legislation that I
> >> can't get my head around.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> However the National Portrait Gallery has its own handy
> http://www.npg.org.uk/about/foi.php
> >> section on FOI, and I don't read that as containing any
> >> substantial claim of exemption from the Act for the gallery.
> >> They also have some fine objectives including "the
> >> provision of access to the national collection of portraits
> >> for all sections of the population" but reassuringly
> >> not "the restriction of access to the national
> >> collection of portraits only to those who can visit the
> >> gallery in person" or "maximising of the
> >> commercial use of the images" ~~~~
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --- On Sat, 11/7/09, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > From: David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com>
> >>
> >> > Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] [Foundation-l] "sue
> >> and be damned" FOI to NPG
> >>
> >> > To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >>
> >> > Date: Saturday, 11 July, 2009, 1:00 PM
> >>
> >> > 2009/7/11 Dahsun <dah...@yahoo.com>:
> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >> > > Perhaps the air would be slightly clearer if
> >> Wikimedia
> >>
> >> > UK were to make Freedom of Information Act requests to
> >> the
> >>
> >> > NPG and other Publicly funded galleries for the
> >> highest def
> >>
> >> > digital photos they have available of any artworks in
> >> their
> >>
> >> > possession.
> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >> > WMUK getting directly involved in this would be very
> >> bad
> >>
> >> > for WMUK's
> >>
> >> > (legal) perceived separation from WMF. Of course,
> >> WMUK
> >>
> >> > could
> >>
> >> > meaningfully comment that "claiming copyright on
> >> something
> >>
> >> > four
> >>
> >> > hundred years old is more than a little odious -
> >> it's not
> >>
> >> > like the
> >>
> >> > painter will paint another painting if only th NPG can
> >> make
> >>
> >> > legal
> >>
> >> > threats."
> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >> > That said, your approach is most certainly
> >> particularly
> >>
> >> > amusing :-D I
> >>
> >> > expect they'd claim these were commercial works
> >> and the
> >>
> >> > core of their
> >>
> >> > business or somesuch.
> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >> > - d.
> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >>
> >> > Wikimedia UK mailing list
> >>
> >> > wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
> >>
> >> > http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
> >>
> >> > WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >>
> >> Wikimedia UK mailing list
> >>
> >> wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
> >>
> >> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
> >>
> >> WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Wikimedia UK mailing list
> >> wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
> >> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
> >> WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia UK mailing list
> > wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
> > WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
> >
>
>
>
> --
> 1001010 1001000110000111011001101100
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia UK mailing list
> wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
> WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

Reply via email to