On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Ray Saintongesaintonge@telus.net wrote: [snip]
If in retrospect, publishing the letter is seen as a strategic mistake, it can't be unpublished. There are arguments available for it being a strategic positive.
One argument for it being a mistake is that the early disclosure has diminished his supporters ability to shape the public debate.
There are some relevant pieces of information that would influence people's opinions, things like that the NPG previously complaining about low resolution photographs and photographs taken by the uploaders. (I haven't gone and tried to find examples from the latter from the NPG, but UK museums have routinely tried to assert copyright over photographs taken by commons contributors).
The real interesting story here is that museums all over the over the world believe that holding the physical good gives them unlimited rights to regulate all uses of copies and even rights to regulate discussions of those works, and that they are now beginning to partner with commercial service providers seeking to monetize that control and becoming litigious as a result. In the end the public's access to the works shrinks, the public domain is eroded, and the lie is put to the lofty claims of education, promotion, and preservation included in the grant requests and mission statements of museums.