[Foundation-l] Bridgeman v. Corel worldwide for Wikimedia Commons - yes or no?

[Ray Saintonge]

Michael Snow wrote:
> Klaus Graf wrote:
>   
>> There are opinions on Commons that Moeller's statement in this list
>> ("[W]e've consistently held that faithful reproductions of
>> two-dimensional public domain works which are nothing more than
>> reproductions should be considered public domain for licensing
>> purposes") has been "overruled" by Mike Godwin's statement (which was
>> adressed on a Wikisource case)
>>
>> See
>> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Licensing#About_Bridgeman_vs._Corel
>>   
>>     
> I'm not offering a legal opinion on the underlying issue, but if I 
> follow the discussion correctly it shows absolutely no reason to think 
> Mike has "overruled" Erik on anything. The statement from Mike that is 
> being pointed to is about a different question entirely.
What's concerning about this is that we are referring to a statement by 
Mike on Anthere's Meta talk page.  If he were providing legal advice to 
the entire community would it not be more appropriate on a page 
addressed to a more general population.  Anybody can read anybody else's 
talk page, but that is as much to enable dialogue between any two 
persons.  I still respect a kind of semi-private quality to personal 
talk pages.  That someone should derive a legal position based on 
eavesdropping onto a personal talk page doesn't seem at all the best way 
to go about this sort of thing.

Ec