[Foundation-l] RfC: Draft licensing policy resolution

effe iets anders effeietsanders at gmail.com
Tue Feb 20 19:34:39 UTC 2007

Well, in your language it might be possible that some people do not like
english. So that might be a reason. And some people think commons is not
being nice, that might be a reason too. And some people think commons is too
big, and it is impossible to find out the procedures, while you know them on
youw own project. That might be a reason too. But there are of course as
well reasons to move it to commons, such as you can scratch a bit of policy
locally, you make the images available for every project, in time you save
WMF-diskspace etc.


2007/2/20, Bence Damokos <bdamokos op gmail.com>:
> On 2/20/07, Bence Damokos <bdamokos op gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > ; Exemption Doctrine Policy (EDP)
> > > : a project-specific policy that, in accordance with United States law
> > > and the law of countries where the project content is predominantly
> > > accessed (if any), recognizes the limitations of copyright law
> > > (including case law) as applicable to the project, and permits the
> > > upload of copyrighted materials that can be legally used in the
> > > context of the project.
> > >
> >
> > Does this mean, that if local law has no Fair Use or similar, then an
> > cannot be made just be considering the US law (ie. Fair Use) ?
> >
> > Thanks in advance
> > Regards, Dami
> And if there is no EDP, is there any point in uploading locally and not to
> Commons directly? (Except the usual, that Commons couldn't handle the
> influx
> of new users, or that its unconvenient unless there is Single User Login)
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l op lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

More information about the foundation-l mailing list