[Foundation-l] Fair Use (again)
teun.spaans at gmail.com
Tue Jan 30 16:48:04 UTC 2007
In the Netherlands, a gallery had hired a photographer to make photos of art
works for their hand out to vistors. The photographer was duely paid for his
The gallery holder put the images also on their website, upon which the
photographer sued the gallery holder.
The judge condemned the gallery holder, she had only permission for hte
handout, and she had to pay the photographed 1000 euro for every day the
photos had been on the website - some 40K.
I am not sure if the gallery holder refused to take them off line or got
sued for just putting them up. This was a lawsuit by an individual
photographer, not by Dutch equivalenst of RIAA or similar copy protection
I tell this because
a) it shows that one can get sued just for putting photos up
b) Sometimes you've got to pay, even when you think you've got all rights.
c) In this case both were in the netherlands, but the one getting sued does
not need to be. I think there was a lawsuit against youtube recently in
Brasil, where youtube was condemned, despite being hosted and all in the
USA. It seems to me that the same might happen to WMF for the Escher images,
despite being classified as "fair use". They are owned by a dutch company,
On 1/30/07, rfrangi at libero.it <rfrangi at libero.it> wrote:
> > Teun Spaans wrote:
> > Does this imply that an Italian chapter could be sued for fair use
> images on
> > the english wiki?
> No, because the italian chapter has nothing to do with the contents of any
> project of wikimedia.
> > Does this mean that the english wiki could potentially be blocked in
> > if "fair use" images are of italian origin?
> Not sure, but I doubt it. I don't think SIAE (the Italian Society of
> Authors and Editors) can ask money to someone outside the national
> Roberto (Snowdog)
> Passa a Infostrada. ADSL e Telefono senza limiti e senza canone Telecom
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
More information about the foundation-l