Re: [Commons-l] Fwd: [Foundation-l] At least 500 images will have to bedeleted from the National Portrait Gallery

Please also look at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:When_to_use_the_PD-Art_tag#Ac cording_to_these_guidelines.2C_all_National_Portrait_Gallery_images_must_be_ deleted_from_the_Commons As I understand our current policy the deletion request is indeed justified. If we decide to change policy that will of course be another matter. But as Historiograf (who seems to be the Klaus Graf of the forwarded email) pointed out nicely I'm apparently incompetent in this domain. Marc aka Caran... -----Original Message----- From: commons-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:commons-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of David Gerard Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 2:42 PM To: Wikimedia Commons Discussion List Subject: [Commons-l] Fwd: [Foundation-l] At least 500 images will have to bedeleted from the National Portrait Gallery wtf? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Klaus Graf <klausgraf(a)googlemail.com> Date: 2008/7/22 Subject: [Foundation-l] At least 500 images will have to be deleted from the National Portrait Gallery To: foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/National_Portrai t_Gallery_images_%28first_set%29 The following was never revoced in this list: "[W]e've consistently held that faithful reproductions of two-dimensional public domain works which are nothing more than reproductions should be considered public domain for licensing purposes" Erik Moeller at http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2008-February/038394.html foundation-l May I also remember Jimbo Wales' Manifesto: "5. Free the Art! Show two 400 year old paintings. Routinely get complaints from museums saying there is copyright infringements. National Portrait Gallery of England threatens to sue, a chilling effect, but they have no grounds." http://ross.typepad.com/blog/2005/08/jimbos_problems_1.html For years there was no doubt that Bridgeman v. Corel was accepted on Commons. It is said that British courts would'nt accept Bridgeman v. Corel but there is no proof for this. It is true, in the contrary, that the NY US judge has diligently discussed UK law with the result that also according UK copyright law mere reproductions are NOT protected. Bridgeman vs. Corel is an essential point for Commons and for all Wikimedia projects. This is not an issue some Commons pseudo-experts could decide. Before 500+ pictures of PUBLIC DOMAIN PAINTINGS are to be deleted the board of the Foundation should decide if Moeller's quote above is still its position. Klaus Graf _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l