Hello everyone.
You may be interested to note that Wikimedia UK is writing to all 73 UK MEPs regarding copyright. In line with the work we've done with the Free Knowledge Advocacy Group EU (group of European Wikimedia chapters) we are looking for support for change in three areas: freedom of panorama; public domain of publicly-funded works; and use of orphan works. If you'd like to see the letter, it's herehttps://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/File:Letter_to_MEPs_with_images.pdf. It will be going out next week (with a couple of minor modifications) in the post and also by email.
Thank you,
Stevie
Thanks for letting people know that the UK chapter is sending this letter.
It is a shame that so few Wikimedians in the UK have contributed to the process, I think it is correct to say that even after counting employees and trustees, the number is fewer than could be counted on the fingers of one hand.
I am assuming that the UK charity is open to receiving feedback, though your email here, nor your equivalent notice on the UK wiki does not invite comment. My apologies if my assumption is unfounded, please ignore the following points if that is the case.
Three points: 1. I note that the letter appears to state that the Free Knowledge Advocacy Group EU is a UK charity, it might be an idea to get the prose slightly more specific.
2. The lead paragraph states "We are the UK based charity that supports and promotes Wikipedia and its sister websites such as Wikimedia Commons". This is quite different from the WMUK Mission as recently approved by the board of trustees which does not mention Wikipedia or Commons. I suggest that in an official letter of this type, that the charity is described as accurately as possible, even in a plain English summary.
3. Were I the recipient I would be unclear if in emailing back, I were responding to the WMUK charity or the Free Knowledge Advocacy Group EU. The Royal "we" used throughout the letter is more than a little confusing as it is signed by the CEO of possibly either (or both) of WMUK and the Advocacy Group and correspondence email is a different personal address. Is the letter intended to be from the UK charity or the group of organizations in the Advocacy Group?
Good luck with the letter. I'm sure that Jon Davies' practical experience in the world of politics will prove useful if any MEP would benefit from a follow-up, such as a discussion over lunch.
Fae
Hi Stevie,
Thanks from me also for sharing this. Some points:
# The images you are using all appear to be copyright violations - not the best move! Why not attribute the images, or link to where they're available on Commons or elsewhere? For the image not covered by FoP, why not do something like the photos in https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Censored_by_lack_of_FOP ? # I'm never sure about how orphan works should relate to free licenses. I'm sure that a number of my CC licensed photos could now be claimed by others to be orphan works as people have taken them from Wikipedia and reused them without attribution. I'd actually suggest removing this point completely unless you can explain how it might work in this sort of case or better nuance the text here. # "As can be seen in this article" won't work once you print the letter out! # What does it mean by 'on your group of MEPs'? Aren't you addressing them individually with this? Are you meaning UK MEPs? # If you want the MEPs to read through to the end, then I'd recommend condensing it down to two sides (and print it double-sided) so that they only have to flip the page over rather than flip through pages. Also, you only need the disclaimer on the first page rather than all three. # I still don't understand why 'start-ups' are mentioned here (as I asked at https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Talk:Free_Knowledge_Advocacy_Group_EU_statemen... but with no reply). # I agree with Fæ's points below.
Thanks, Mike
On 14 Mar 2014, at 17:54, Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for letting people know that the UK chapter is sending this letter.
It is a shame that so few Wikimedians in the UK have contributed to the process, I think it is correct to say that even after counting employees and trustees, the number is fewer than could be counted on the fingers of one hand.
I am assuming that the UK charity is open to receiving feedback, though your email here, nor your equivalent notice on the UK wiki does not invite comment. My apologies if my assumption is unfounded, please ignore the following points if that is the case.
Three points:
I note that the letter appears to state that the Free Knowledge Advocacy Group EU is a UK charity, it might be an idea to get the prose slightly more specific.
The lead paragraph states "We are the UK based charity that supports and promotes Wikipedia and its sister websites such as Wikimedia Commons". This is quite different from the WMUK Mission as recently approved by the board of trustees which does not mention Wikipedia or Commons. I suggest that in an official letter of this type, that the charity is described as accurately as possible, even in a plain English summary.
Were I the recipient I would be unclear if in emailing back, I were responding to the WMUK charity or the Free Knowledge Advocacy Group EU. The Royal "we" used throughout the letter is more than a little confusing as it is signed by the CEO of possibly either (or both) of WMUK and the Advocacy Group and correspondence email is a different personal address. Is the letter intended to be from the UK charity or the group of organizations in the Advocacy Group?
Good luck with the letter. I'm sure that Jon Davies' practical experience in the world of politics will prove useful if any MEP would benefit from a follow-up, such as a discussion over lunch.
Fae
faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
On 15 March 2014 14:18, Gordon Joly gordon.joly@pobox.com wrote:
On 14/03/14 17:54, Fæ wrote:
I note that the letter appears to state that the Free Knowledge Advocacy Group EU is a UK charity, it might be an idea to get the prose slightly more specific.
Where exactly? Gordo
It's been 4 days, for all I know the letter has already been sent.
Sorry Gordo, but until there is some acknowledgement that the feedback that members and volunteers are providing might result in the letter being improved, there does not seem much point in spending our volunteer time discussing it.
Fae
Just to be clear, it has been 1.5 working days. The document was posted on the wiki late on Friday afternoon.
Thank you to those volunteers who have provided useful feedback. The letter has not yet been sent and amends will be made. A final version will be posted on the wiki when it is sent out.
Stevie
On 18 March 2014 13:21, Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
On 15 March 2014 14:18, Gordon Joly gordon.joly@pobox.com wrote:
On 14/03/14 17:54, Fæ wrote:
I note that the letter appears to state that the Free Knowledge Advocacy Group EU is a UK charity, it might be an idea to get the prose slightly more specific.
Where exactly? Gordo
It's been 4 days, for all I know the letter has already been sent.
Sorry Gordo, but until there is some acknowledgement that the feedback that members and volunteers are providing might result in the letter being improved, there does not seem much point in spending our volunteer time discussing it.
Fae
faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
On 18 March 2014 13:28, Stevie Benton stevie.benton@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
Just to be clear, it has been 1.5 working days. The document was posted on the wiki late on Friday afternoon.
Thank you to those volunteers who have provided useful feedback. The letter has not yet been sent and amends will be made. A final version will be posted on the wiki when it is sent out.
Stevie
Thanks for making us aware of your plan. What was the reason for choosing to write the letter off-wiki and in a non-open format, where volunteers cannot actively help?
I was under the impression that the Free Knowledge Advocacy Group was intended to be driven by Wikimedians rather than this being left to Chapter board members and employees who then choose how and whether to consult with volunteers. The process being followed right now seems the opposite of volunteer-centric.
PS Gordo - if by her you mean Stevie, then as he posted here, it is reasonable to assume he follows the discussion.
Fae
On 18/03/14 13:21, Fæ wrote:
Sorry Gordo, but until there is some acknowledgement that the feedback that members and volunteers are providing might result in the letter being improved, there does not seem much point in spending our volunteer time discussing it.
OK. Does that include posting her on the topic?
Gordo
On 14 March 2014 17:11, Stevie Benton stevie.benton@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
Wikimedia UK is writing to all 73 UK MEPs regarding copyright
I would expect to see such a letter signed by the Chair of the board rather than the CEx, or at least by both.
The reply address should be copyright@, or some other role-based name, rather than an individual (no offence to Stevie; this is a general point).
The FoP image pair is misleading, as the HoP would be out of copyright; a modern building in the UK should be used, perhaps the Welsh Assembly, or the Gherkin?
I suggest the reference to pictures taken in Strasbourg be expanded slightly to mention the "WikiLovesParliaments" event; many MEPs participated and will recall it, hopefully favourably.
Thanks for making these representations on our behalf,
Sounds to me like using a non-individual email is a good idea. I'll look into getting something set up.
On 18 March 2014 14:36, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
On 14 March 2014 17:11, Stevie Benton stevie.benton@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
Wikimedia UK is writing to all 73 UK MEPs regarding copyright
I would expect to see such a letter signed by the Chair of the board rather than the CEx, or at least by both.
The reply address should be copyright@, or some other role-based name, rather than an individual (no offence to Stevie; this is a general point).
The FoP image pair is misleading, as the HoP would be out of copyright; a modern building in the UK should be used, perhaps the Welsh Assembly, or the Gherkin?
I suggest the reference to pictures taken in Strasbourg be expanded slightly to mention the "WikiLovesParliaments" event; many MEPs participated and will recall it, hopefully favourably.
Thanks for making these representations on our behalf,
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
That's really helpful feedback Andy, thank you. Will certainly take into account. And it's very nice to be thanked, I appreciate it and you're very welcome.
Stevie
On 18 March 2014 14:45, Richard Nevell richard.nevell@wikimedia.org.ukwrote:
Sounds to me like using a non-individual email is a good idea. I'll look into getting something set up.
On 18 March 2014 14:36, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
On 14 March 2014 17:11, Stevie Benton stevie.benton@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
Wikimedia UK is writing to all 73 UK MEPs regarding copyright
I would expect to see such a letter signed by the Chair of the board rather than the CEx, or at least by both.
The reply address should be copyright@, or some other role-based name, rather than an individual (no offence to Stevie; this is a general point).
The FoP image pair is misleading, as the HoP would be out of copyright; a modern building in the UK should be used, perhaps the Welsh Assembly, or the Gherkin?
I suggest the reference to pictures taken in Strasbourg be expanded slightly to mention the "WikiLovesParliaments" event; many MEPs participated and will recall it, hopefully favourably.
Thanks for making these representations on our behalf,
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
-- Richard Nevell Assistant Office Manager Wikimedia UK +44 (0) 20 7065 0753
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
Just reviewing this feedback there's a couple of specific points I want to address.
- "Copy violations" for images. I am going to link to them in the digital version and give an accreditation in the printed version. - Links are included for the digital version. They will be added as citations for the print version. - With reference to "groups of MEPs" - Mike, this is pretty standard. Each MEP represents either a political party or are independent. Each party / independent (in almost every case) is a part of a wider, cross-Europe grouping. For example, UK Independence Party MEPs are mostly members of the wider "Europe of Freedom and Democracy Group". - Andy, your comment about the House of Commons is noted. I shall replace that image. - Mike, I'm pretty certain we have discussed the mention of start-ups before. It is about noting that many different groups will benefit from change. Competition, particularly in tech, is very important to Europe on a global level. Noting that these changes benefit start-ups as well as other groups is really speaking to them in a language they will understand and respond to. - Andy, your point about the reply address is sensible. We are now establishing a new email address specifically for this project.
I will share a final version later in the week once the letter has been posted. Thanks for the constructive viewpoints.
Stevie
On 18 March 2014 15:11, Stevie Benton stevie.benton@wikimedia.org.ukwrote:
That's really helpful feedback Andy, thank you. Will certainly take into account. And it's very nice to be thanked, I appreciate it and you're very welcome.
Stevie
On 18 March 2014 14:45, Richard Nevell richard.nevell@wikimedia.org.ukwrote:
Sounds to me like using a non-individual email is a good idea. I'll look into getting something set up.
On 18 March 2014 14:36, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
On 14 March 2014 17:11, Stevie Benton stevie.benton@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
Wikimedia UK is writing to all 73 UK MEPs regarding copyright
I would expect to see such a letter signed by the Chair of the board rather than the CEx, or at least by both.
The reply address should be copyright@, or some other role-based name, rather than an individual (no offence to Stevie; this is a general point).
The FoP image pair is misleading, as the HoP would be out of copyright; a modern building in the UK should be used, perhaps the Welsh Assembly, or the Gherkin?
I suggest the reference to pictures taken in Strasbourg be expanded slightly to mention the "WikiLovesParliaments" event; many MEPs participated and will recall it, hopefully favourably.
Thanks for making these representations on our behalf,
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
-- Richard Nevell Assistant Office Manager Wikimedia UK +44 (0) 20 7065 0753
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
--
Stevie Benton Head of External Relations Wikimedia UK +44 (0) 20 7065 0993 / +44 (0) 7803 505 173 @StevieBenton
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
On 19 March 2014 12:40, Stevie Benton stevie.benton@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
Just reviewing this feedback there's a couple of specific points I want to address.
"Copy violations" for images. I am going to link to them in the digital version and give an accreditation in the printed version. Links are included for the digital version. They will be added as citations for the print version. With reference to "groups of MEPs" - Mike, this is pretty standard. Each MEP represents either a political party or are independent. Each party / independent (in almost every case) is a part of a wider, cross-Europe grouping. For example, UK Independence Party MEPs are mostly members of the wider "Europe of Freedom and Democracy Group". Andy, your comment about the House of Commons is noted. I shall replace that image. Mike, I'm pretty certain we have discussed the mention of start-ups before. It is about noting that many different groups will benefit from change. Competition, particularly in tech, is very important to Europe on a global level. Noting that these changes benefit start-ups as well as other groups is really speaking to them in a language they will understand and respond to. Andy, your point about the reply address is sensible. We are now establishing a new email address specifically for this project.
I will share a final version later in the week once the letter has been posted. Thanks for the constructive viewpoints.
Stevie
Thanks for answering some of the points in this email thread.
It is pretty obvious that you have chosen to ignore mine. I guess this is your call as it is your letter.
Fae
Hello all,
Just to follow this up, the final version of the letter has now been sent and takes into account some of the suggested revisions. It can be seen at https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/File:Letter_to_MEPs_with_images.pdf - thanks again for the useful feedback.
Stevie
On 19 March 2014 13:32, Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
On 19 March 2014 12:40, Stevie Benton stevie.benton@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
Just reviewing this feedback there's a couple of specific points I want
to
address.
"Copy violations" for images. I am going to link to them in the digital version and give an accreditation in the printed version. Links are included for the digital version. They will be added as
citations
for the print version. With reference to "groups of MEPs" - Mike, this is pretty standard. Each
MEP
represents either a political party or are independent. Each party / independent (in almost every case) is a part of a wider, cross-Europe grouping. For example, UK Independence Party MEPs are mostly members of
the
wider "Europe of Freedom and Democracy Group". Andy, your comment about the House of Commons is noted. I shall replace
that
image. Mike, I'm pretty certain we have discussed the mention of start-ups
before.
It is about noting that many different groups will benefit from change. Competition, particularly in tech, is very important to Europe on a
global
level. Noting that these changes benefit start-ups as well as other
groups
is really speaking to them in a language they will understand and respond to. Andy, your point about the reply address is sensible. We are now establishing a new email address specifically for this project.
I will share a final version later in the week once the letter has been posted. Thanks for the constructive viewpoints.
Stevie
Thanks for answering some of the points in this email thread.
It is pretty obvious that you have chosen to ignore mine. I guess this is your call as it is your letter.
Fae
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
On 21 March 2014 16:11, Stevie Benton stevie.benton@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
Hello all,
Just to follow this up, the final version of the letter has now been sent and takes into account some of the suggested revisions. It can be seen at https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/File:Letter_to_MEPs_with_images.pdf - thanks again for the useful feedback.
Stevie
I hope it goes well. What was the feedback from international community members you mentioned on the Watercooler, is that available as open discussion somewhere?
Fae
The feedback from international community was via the Advocacy mailing list which is, as far as I am aware, open for sign-ups.
Also, I wanted to add a note of thanks to a volunteer called Emily Sorensen who helped me put together the letter, sourced good examples and is also going to help me with the follow-up. her support was extremely useful.
Thanks,
Stevie
On 21 March 2014 16:17, Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
On 21 March 2014 16:11, Stevie Benton stevie.benton@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
Hello all,
Just to follow this up, the final version of the letter has now been sent and takes into account some of the suggested revisions. It can be seen at https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/File:Letter_to_MEPs_with_images.pdf -
thanks
again for the useful feedback.
Stevie
I hope it goes well. What was the feedback from international community members you mentioned on the Watercooler, is that available as open discussion somewhere?
Fae
faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
On 21 March 2014 16:21, Stevie Benton stevie.benton@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
The feedback from international community was via the Advocacy mailing list
The comments can be read in the archive at http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/advocacy_advisors/2014-March/000425.html.
I note this message http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/advocacy_advisors/2014-March/000432.html which I had not seen before, and is presumably why the letter was afterwards sent to this list, so that the members of the charity could have a few days to say something about your letter before you sent it.
Fae
Hello folks,
Just an update on this. We've received four messages of support so far and I anticipate more will follow. Two Lib-Dems, one Conservative and one Labour MEP have been in touch so far. Please do feel free to contact your local representatives to remind them of the benefits of change to copyright!
Many thanks,
Stevie
On 21 March 2014 17:57, Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
On 21 March 2014 16:21, Stevie Benton stevie.benton@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
The feedback from international community was via the Advocacy mailing
list
The comments can be read in the archive at < http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/advocacy_advisors/2014-March/000425.htm...
.
I note this message < http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/advocacy_advisors/2014-March/000432.htm...
which I had not seen before, and is presumably why the letter was afterwards sent to this list, so that the members of the charity could have a few days to say something about your letter before you sent it.
Fae
faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
On 2 April 2014 14:17, Stevie Benton stevie.benton@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: ...
Just an update on this. We've received four messages of support so far and I anticipate more will follow. Two Lib-Dems, one Conservative and one Labour MEP have been in touch so far. Please do feel free to contact your local representatives to remind them of the benefits of change to copyright!
Thanks for the update on your letter. I make that about a 5% success rate though this may be explained as it was only sent 12 days ago.
Fae
That may well explain it
On 2 April 2014 14:52, Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
On 2 April 2014 14:17, Stevie Benton stevie.benton@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: ...
Just an update on this. We've received four messages of support so far
and I
anticipate more will follow. Two Lib-Dems, one Conservative and one
Labour
MEP have been in touch so far. Please do feel free to contact your local representatives to remind them of the benefits of change to copyright!
Thanks for the update on your letter. I make that about a 5% success rate though this may be explained as it was only sent 12 days ago.
Fae
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
On Apr 2, 2014 2:52 PM, "Fæ" faewik@gmail.com wrote:
On 2 April 2014 14:17, Stevie Benton stevie.benton@wikimedia.org.uk
wrote:
...
Just an update on this. We've received four messages of support so far
and I
anticipate more will follow. Two Lib-Dems, one Conservative and one
Labour
MEP have been in touch so far. Please do feel free to contact your local representatives to remind them of the benefits of change to copyright!
Thanks for the update on your letter. I make that about a 5% success rate though this may be explained as it was only sent 12 days ago.
No, that's a ~5% /response/ rate.
Success may be measured in other ways, depending on the aims of the exercise.
On 2 April 2014 20:25, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote: ...
Success may be measured in other ways, depending on the aims of the exercise.
True, this is why defining measurements for success on all our projects (at least the ones that spend the donor's money and rely on employee time) is something we should do as standard. Without this, nobody will ever agree whether the outcome is a success we should repeat, or a ... let's try the popular Realpolitik ... "not-success" that we should learn from.
Fae
wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org