I redid this whole area from scratch in the new codebase. Let me know if my changes address your concerns. It allows deletion of files, revision histories, lists what pages link to which images (the database is a bit out-of date on that--but the features work in the software). Currently it warns about, but does not restrict, the uploading of files other than PNG, JPEG, and GIF. I can easily be talked into eliminating GIF from that list and adding OGG, and we might want to add a feature for being able to include sounds, especially for things like pronunciations of words.
As always, I welcome bug reports and suggestions.
http://www.piclab.com/newwiki/wiki.phtml
0
GIF is in itself a copyrighted, or rather a patented, file format. Therefore it is just as legally problematic to upload GIF images to the Wikipedia without permission from the patent-holder as it is to upload any other form of copyrighted material without the permission of the copyright-holder.
If we aren't allowing other forms of copyright material, why are we allowing GIF materials ? I strongly recommend that we don't in order to reduce Wikipedia's exposure to possible legal problems.
Cheers
Derek
----- Original Message ----- From: lcrocker@nupedia.com To: wikipedia-l@nupedia.com Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2002 6:27 AM Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] file uploads
I redid this whole area from scratch in the new codebase. Let me know if my changes address your concerns. It allows deletion of files, revision histories, lists what pages link to which images (the database is a bit out-of date on that--but the features work in the software). Currently it warns about, but does not restrict, the uploading of files other than PNG, JPEG, and GIF. I can easily be talked into eliminating GIF from that list and adding OGG, and we might want to add a feature for being able to include sounds, especially for things like pronunciations of words.
As always, I welcome bug reports and suggestions.
On Sun, 9 Jun 2002, Derek Ross wrote:
GIF is in itself a copyrighted, or rather a patented, file format. Therefore it is just as legally problematic to upload GIF images to the Wikipedia without permission from the patent-holder as it is to upload any other form of copyrighted material without the permission of the copyright-holder.
Didn't the patent for the compression scheme used in GIF recently expire?
Also, isn't it just the "compressing party" that would be hit by such a patent? (I don't need to pay patent fees for collecting used machines containing patented gear.)
-- Daniel
----- Original Message ----- From: "Hr. Daniel Mikkelsen" daniel@copyleft.no To: wikipedia-l@nupedia.com Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2002 11:44 PM Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] file uploads
On Sun, 9 Jun 2002, Derek Ross wrote:
GIF is in itself a copyrighted, or rather a patented, file format. Therefore it is just as legally problematic to upload GIF images to the Wikipedia without permission from the patent-holder as it is to upload
any
other form of copyrighted material without the permission of the copyright-holder.
Didn't the patent for the compression scheme used in GIF recently expire?
Also, isn't it just the "compressing party" that would be hit by such a patent? (I don't need to pay patent fees for collecting used machines containing patented gear.)
Maybe it has expired, maybe it hasn't. Unisys don't seem to think that it has (http://www.unisys.com/unisys/lzw/). The FSF doesn't think that it will expire until 2003 (http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/gif.html). It seems to me that the simplest way to deal with the problem is to avoid it by not accepting GIFs. That way we're in the clear no matter what the current position is.
Cheers
Derek
On Mon, 10 Jun 2002, Derek Ross wrote:
Didn't the patent for the compression scheme used in GIF recently expire?
Also, isn't it just the "compressing party" that would be hit by such a patent? (I don't need to pay patent fees for collecting used machines containing patented gear.)
Maybe it has expired, maybe it hasn't. Unisys don't seem to think that it has (http://www.unisys.com/unisys/lzw/). The FSF doesn't think that it will expire until 2003 (http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/gif.html). It seems to me that the simplest way to deal with the problem is to avoid it by not accepting GIFs. That way we're in the clear no matter what the current position is.
Still, as long as Wikipedia neither codes nor decodes GIFs, how can it be in violation?
-- Daniel
At 11:28 PM 6/09/02 +0100, Derek Ross wrote:
GIF is in itself a copyrighted, or rather a patented, file format. Therefore it is just as legally problematic to upload GIF images to the Wikipedia without permission from the patent-holder as it is to upload any other form of copyrighted material without the permission of the copyright-holder.
Actually, as far as I know, the only thing that the patent covers is gif _encoders._ Unisys (or whoever it is that currently holds the patent) has absolutely no right to individual gif _files;_ all they can do is sell licences to people that allow them to write programs that can produce gifs. You will find many pieces of free software which can open and view gifs but cannot _save_ gifs because of this.
And even if I write an unlicenced program that saves gifs, while the program _itself_ is illegal and cannot be distributed, the gifs it _produces_ are still solely the property of whoever made them. I could get sued for writing and distributing the program, but they can't touch the gifs I made with them.
So personally, I think allowing gifs on wikipedia should be just fine. It is entirely possible for a gif file to be public domain.
I am not a lawyer, of course. But I'm sure this question comes up over and over for many different projects, so I'm sure it should be possible to find a real lawyer's statement somewhere to confirm or refute this.
-- "Let there be light." - Last words of Bomb #20, "Dark Star"
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org