On 23/03/2008, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 23/03/2008, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Given MP's demonstrated ability to come up
with copyright terms that
are some of the most bizarrely messy I've ever seen (and if rather
than a International Obfuscated C Code Contest there was a
International Obfuscated Copyright Statement Contest some of the stuff
I've run across would probably win) I'd rather not. We get a slow flow
of images through fromowner of MPs and the ones from the MP's offices
tend to be the most problematical.
Sounds like making free content normal (and our jargon definition of
the word "free" normative) is more important than I'd thought ...
Yes and no an example would be
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Kevan_jones_mp.jpg
The problem is not so much definitions of free more that I ultimately
have no idea what the uploader's statement adds up to (actually I note
they replied on their talk page so now I do know that it adds up to
non free).
--
geni