On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Klaus Graf <klausgraf(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
2010/10/5 John Vandenberg <jayvdb(a)gmail.com>om>:
However,
texts without scans are *harmful* to Wikisource.
I long for the day when the vast majority of our texts are based on
scans, however I disagree that texts without scans are, by that fact
along [sic: should have been alone], harmful.
I fully agree.
For example, here is one text that I find extremely useful, as
Wikimedia Australia is incorporated under this law.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Associations_Incorporation_Act_1981_%28Victor…
Scans are definitely crown copyright, so it isn't possible to upload scans.
This is a very special case. If a representation of a PD text which
one need for proofreading at WS is not free, the WS text cannot be
regarded as free. If I could I would speedy delete the text.
There are quite a few specical cases where the text is PD, but the
full scan is not.
e.g. where illustrations on the pages are still covered by copyright,
but the words are not.
I do not think that we need longer tolerance for
projects tolerating
scan-less texts. In 99,9 percent of all scan-less cases there are NO
legal obstacles like in the Australian case.
maybe we need a cross-language discussion (on
www.wikisource.org?),
where we formally change the rule for all projects to disallow texts
without scans, with caveats for the special cases which we agree are
required.
e.g. we could decide that existing projects with less than 1,000 pages
are not required to use proofread page, but any _new_ language project
must use proofread page. I think that would mean that 'cs' and 'th'
are the only projects which would need to start using proofread page.
--
John Vandenberg