Obligatory: I'm not a lawyer (or an expert) but did try to poke around a bit
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 12:18 AM, Yann Forget <yannfo(a)gmail.com> wrote:
1. Did Gallimard send a lawsuit? If yes, the Wikisource community, and
probably many other contributors might be interested
to know about it.
If not, how long do we have to wait before restoring the deleted
From what I understand they only sent the Cease and Desist letter. My
of the law and Mike is that by following through with that
letter they greatly protect themselves from any future lawsuit because they
did so (even if you file a counter-notice and reupload, and they don't
2. Is there on-going negotiations with Gallimard?
There were some but not anymore according to him in another email (I assume
you'll probably see that before I send this...) I think the problem now is
that by releasing the content of those you can make it less likely future
groups will negotiate because they know you may release it.
> 3. I am not sure I understand the process you mention in another mail
> about reposting the content, compliant with applicable
> notice-and-takedown law. Someone else might also be able to explain
> After poking around a bit both
(which has some nice
be good places to start. Actually that is the last part in a for part
article that actually looks like it would be very helpful reading on the
topic (I haven't read it all yet but looks good so far).
Basically the idea is that if you send a letter to the WMF saying that you
do indeed have the right to upload "such and such" and the company was
mistaken in requesting it's removal (I believe you have to copy in the
sender of the take down notice as well but I don't see it in every example
I've seen). Once the WMF receives that they are under no obligation to
remove the content anymore (again, I think).