Thank you, Ryan.
I did a quick check. The count for that Template:PD-Layout is indeed some
3.3 million.
I went to commons, and looked up the Template:PD-Layout. I think the correct
link is:
.
Then I looked up the lionk: What links here. The first one was:
With a death of the author in 1850, that seems to me to be outside the scope
of this law. Though this is just one example, it indicates that the count
may be too generous.
Just to have an indication of the size, i went through the first 5 of the
links:
File:Chinese_opera051.jpg : 19th century drawing of Chinese opera, public
domain from en wiki
File:Alicebeggar.png : Description *English:* "Alice Pleasance
a beggar girl."
This was first published in Carroll's biography by his
nephew: Collingwood, Stuart Dodgson (1898).
File:LocatieRotterdam.png : This work has been released into the *public
by its author,
*Mtcv<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Mtcv>
*. This applies worldwide.
File:AliceSilvy.png: Date 1861
None of these 5 seem to qualify as fitting into the gap of death of the
author between 50 and 70 years ago, though for File:Alicebeggar.png and
File:AliceSilvy.png: this is not 100% sure - if the artist was 20 years old
in 1861, and became 91, he died in 1942, just 69 years ago.
It looks to me that the template PD-Layout is too general. And a count of
PD-old gives just 17K.
kind regards,
Teun Spaans
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:02 AM, Ryan Kaldari<rkaldari(a)wikimedia.org>wrote;wrote:
It's based on the template transclusion count
here:
http://toolserver.org/~jarry/templatecount/index.php?lang=commons&name=…
Ryan Kaldari
On 6/23/11 1:01 PM, teun spaans wrote:
The number of 3 million surpises me. Common
hosts about 10 million
items.
Are you certain this amount is approximately
correct?
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Geoff Brigham<gbrigham(a)wikimedia.org
wrote:
> Yesterday, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) filed an amicus
> ("friends of the court") brief in Golan v. Holder, a case of great
> importance before the Supreme Court that will affect our understanding
of
> the public domain for years to come. See
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golan_v._Holder. The EFF is representing
the
> Wikimedia Foundation in addition to the
American Association of
Libraries,
> the Association of College and Research
Libraries, the Association of
> Research Libraries, the University of Michigan Dean of Libraries, and
the
> Internet Archive.
>
> This case raises critical issues as to whether Congress may withdraw
works
> from the public domain and throw them back
under a copyright regime. In
> 1994, in response to the U.S. joining of the Berne Convention, Congress
> granted copyright protection to a large body of foreign works that the
> Copyright Act had previously placed in the public domain. Affected
> cultural
> goods probably number in the millions, including, for example,
Metropolis
> (1927), The Third Man (1949), Prokofiev's
Peter in the Wolf, music by
> Stravinsky, paintings by Picasso, drawings by M.C. Escher, films by
> Fellini,
> Hitchcock, and Renoir, and writings by George Orwell, Virginia Woolf,
and
> J.R.R. Tolkien.
>
> The petitioners are orchestra conductors, educators, performers, film
> archivists, and motion picture distributors who depend upon the public
> domain for their livelihood. They filed suit in 2001, pointing out that
> Congress exceeded its power under the Copyright Clause and the First
> Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. They eventually won at the district
> court level, but that decision was overturned on appeal in the Tenth
> Circuit. The U.S. Supreme Court - which rarely grants review - did so
> here.
>
> Petitioners filed their brief last week, and you can find it here:
>
http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/node/6684. We are expecting a number of
> parties to file "friends of the court" briefs. The EFF's brief can
be
> found here:
http://www.eff.org/cases/golan-v-holder .
>
> The Wikimedia Foundation joined the EFF brief in light of the
tremendously
> important role that the public domain plays
in our mission to "collect
and
> develop educational content under a free
license or in the public
domain,
> and to disseminate it effectively and
globally." We host millions of
works
> in the public domain and are dependent on
thousands of volunteers to
search
> out and archive these works. Wikimedia
Commons alone boasts
approximately
> 3
> million items in these cultural commons. To put it bluntly, Congress
> cannot
> be permitted the power to remove such works from the public domain
whenever
> it finds it suitable to do so. It is not
right - legally or morally.
The
> Copyright Clause expressly requires limits on
copyright terms. The
First
> Amendment disallows theft from the creative
commons. Such works belong
to
our
global knowledge. For this reason, we join with the EFF and many
others
to encourage the Court to overturn a law that so threatens our public
domain
- not only with respect to the particular works at issue but also with
respect to the bad precedent such a law would set for the future.
We anticipate the Court will reach a decision sometime before July 2012.
--
Geoff Brigham
General Counsel
Wikimedia Foundation
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: