At 2002-09-10 18:05 -0700, Daniel Mayer wrote:
On Tuesday 10 September 2002 05:28 pm, you wrote:
Correction: We didn't arrive at a consensus
on the Dutch Wikipedia.
I think that a small fragment should be fair-use. Also under Dutch
law (which is basically the same as current USA/international law
as I explained here earlier). On the Dutch Wikipedia we decided
to 'disallow' such audio fragments for now because there was little
need for it yet and we didn't want to pursue the matter further
at this stage.
Greetings,
Jaap
Unless I am mistaken, the Dutch Wikipedia is hosted in the United States
along with the other Wikipedias. Therefore US law is the only one that
counts.
Nice point!
But you can make any policies you wish for your own
'pedia so long as
it doesn't break US law (which I do believe is a lot more permissive in this
case).
Well your argument at least illustrates that our BUMA/STEMRA would
have a hard case against a site in the USA breaking (perhaps) Dutch
law.
The international consequences of the internet are still quite
debatable anyway.
Like Lee, I wouldn't mind challenging the BUMA/STEMRA on this.
I even proposed sending an email to BUMA/STEMRA asking for
their opinion.
But I agree with 'our leader' Giskard that there is no hurry...
Greetings,
Jaap