On 9/14/06, Alison Wheeler <wikimedia(a)alisonwheeler.com> wrote:
On Thu, September 14, 2006 04:31, Brianna Laugher
wrote:
I dislike the idea of this because there is no
1-to-1 correspondence
between language and country. en.wp is the Wikipedia of choice for
most of the world.
Just to clarify, that is *exactly* the reason I put up the 'status' test
page; I was listing jurisdictions against copyright status, not language.
I like the idea. Just some of the examples, even fake, are really
badly chosen. *winks* You can't put a work under PD in France for
example.
Whilst we can utilise the law in the uploader's location, or in the USA,
to determine some things it is absolutely clear that we cannot rely on
either of those two locations to give us carte blanche to use that image
everywhere in the world; a jurisdictional approach will be the only way,
moreso for content re-users than for WMF projects directly.
I believe unfortunately that both USA law and law of the country of
the uploader need to be obeserved. My take in the end though, is that
until we've had to defend ourselves to the end on real issues and a
court somewhere has ruled what law applies, we will just be debating
to no avail.
Delphine
--
~notafish