On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 11:42 AM, <WJhonson(a)aol.com> wrote:
The question again is not taking a copy of things.
It's taking a copy of my
photograph.
I photograph the Taj Mahal and put it on my own web page.
You take my copy and post it to Commons.
That's what you want? That seems legitimate?
Answer that question.
It would be legitimate if copyright law permitted it. In that case it
likely does not. What case law we have suggests that photographing a
three-dimensional object requires a sufficient amount of creativity to
be a copyrightable work. Thus, you would hold a valid copyright in
that photograph and I would respect the law.
When we're talking about commercial organizations, they will do
anything they are legally permitted to do that will further their
interests. It is their duty to do so, in fact, if they're a US public
company. I fail to see why Wikipedia, or other free-content
organizations, or individuals, need to respect some additional moral
imperative you seem to see above and beyond that, when commercial
organizations will not respect any such.
-Matt