Yes, I am working on this now, and will put up a proposal to amend policy on Commons in the next day or two. It is of particular relevance to UK Crown Copyright works.

Michael

On 30 Dec 2013, at 14:56, Fæ faewik+commons@gmail.com wrote:

The URAA is rather more than theoretical. There is more milage in developing a defensive approach for orphan works. Again I think an inclusive discussion on Commons is more useful if anyone intends to progress this.

Fae On 30 Dec 2013 14:04, "Newyorkbrad" newyorkbrad@gmail.com wrote:

...

I have no role or participation on Commons, but from my work on English WP I'm aware of the very real copyright status of "free as a practical matter although someone could theoretically make a disputed technical argument otherwise."

One solution, where there is a good-faith argument the image is free and no rights-holder claiming otherwise, would be a disclaimer. Perhaps something along the lines of "It is believed this image is in the public domain [or, the status of this image depends on resolution of an open legal issue, or whatever] and therefore eligible for inclusion on Wikimedia Commons and for re-use. However, it is possible that the free status of this image could be disputed because [brief explanation of reason]. Potential re-users should therefore proceed cautiously."

I hasten to add that this would be appropriate only where the impediment to freedom is seen as mostly theoretical, not to screw over legitimate claims by rightsholders or by people with privacy interests implicated by the image.

Newyorkbrad