Ok lets stop being complete dumbasses. most of the images can have the NASA logo removed, without harming the image. So lets just get our heads out of the sand and actual be productive. I spent about five minutes and removed two logos from a image and re-uploaded it to commons under a PD license per NASA's rights.
Betacommand
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 8:06 PM, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 02/04/2008, Ian Woollard ian.woollard@gmail.com wrote:
On 01/04/2008, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
Seems to me this is pretty similar; you appear to be worried that somebody, somewhere doing something that is not routinely done on
the
wikipedia could possibly break the law.
You know what? Yeah, they could. And how is this the wikipedia's problem?
Because it is a problem caused by the material being non free.
Hah! Is it a problem with a GFDL'd image that if you hand painted a meatball in it that it becomes illegal? Gasp! GFDL clearly isn't free! OMG you can't make all derived works!!!! Delete all the GFDL'd images from the wikipedia immediately!!!
Pure GFDL is non free we know this. But that is an aside. That you cannot combine non free with free material is a feature not a bug.
No, in general it's a problem due to living a society with laws that apply to images. Some of these laws put restrictions on what images you can *make* in any way, as a derived work or *otherwise*. None of the NASA images stop you making derivatives *from* then. They are free images in any *sensible* definition.
Not really. By the standards you've just used crown copyright images are free.
And yes, there are images you can't make from NASA images. But they are images you can't make *anyway*.
No there are images I can't make from images with the NASA logo (okey technically I'm not sure how the extradition hearing would work out). Remove the logo and I can make them.
-- geni
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l