You could always inform them that they are free to print the WLM photographs as postcards and sell them themselves =)

Jokes aside this will always be the case when business interests clash. I'd also assume Encyclopedia Britannica tells it's professional editors not to improve articles on Wikipedia since it competes with their product.

The only thing I took offence to was that the wording (at least to my now somewhat neglected French) was that the competition only pretended to be philanthropic whilst having crass commercialism as it's true goal. This is something I feel is misrepresented. Would be interesting to hear if they also view Wikipedia as a similar commercial product or if they are just unaware that CC-NC is (almost) never allowed within the wikisphere.

Andre

On 28 October 2011 15:30, Marco Chiesa <chiesa.marco@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 4:14 PM, Strainu <strainu10@gmail.com> wrote:

> "Presented as a philanthropic operation, this initiative looks more
> like a commercial action. Indeed, the participation is conditioned by
> the acceptance of a CC license allowing the commercial reuse of the
> pictures.
>
> Private or public entities can therefore use this pictures legally as
> postcards, posters, books or as illustrations in the press.
>
> The professional photographers living from the copyrights are worried
> by this initiative [...]"
>
> Strainu

My personal opinion is that the real meaning is: "some of our members
didn't bother to read the rules of the contest and discovered too late
that people could reuse their work" or "There are some really good
photographers out there who share their work for free so how on earth
are we going to charge a lot of money for a bunch of good photos?"

Cruccone

_______________________________________________
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu