MusicBrainz (CC0 licensed music metadata project, think Wikidata for
music) announced today that they prevailed against Philpot
<https://blog.metabrainz.org/2019/06/25/we-were-sued-by-a-copyright-troll-and-we-prevailed/>
and had a court dismiss the suit with prejudice.
Some discussion (including Nemo mentioning this thread, thanks!) is
happening on Twitter:
<https://twitter.com/vrandezo/status/1143548566775853056>.
Myself and other Wikimedians are also MusicBrainz contributors, and I'm
pretty sure even more of us are consumers through
Amazon/last.fm/Spotify/etc. so it would be nice if we could figure out
their remaining concerns with using images from Commons, and a way forward.
-- Legoktm
On 4/24/19 3:58 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) via Commons-l wrote:
See
<https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2019/04/photographer-sues-for-failure-to-provide-creative-commons-required-attribution-philpot-v-wos.htm>
This was briefly discussed also at
<https://2019.copyleftconf.org/schedule/presentation/11/>
I tried to make a list of some of Philpot cases (attached).
Federico
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
Commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l