[Foundation-l] Commons and The Year of the Picture

[Geoffrey Plourde]

What he is pointing out is that the chapter set up the whole process, thus making them culpable. 




________________________________
From: Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 12:14:45 PM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Commons and The Year of the Picture

Hoi,
In your post the crucial bit is that a liability results as a consequence of
an invoice from either the Wikimedia Foundation or from a WMF chapter. This
will not happen because you buy a print from a printer. Our terms of service
explicitly state that we do our utmost to ensure that our products are free
to use but that we do not guarantee this.

As to convincing me that there is a problem, first make plain what the
problem is and when a little bit of analysis shows that you did not make it
plain, you indeed have no chance in hell of convincing me. If you know
anything at all of the WMF you would know the number of lawyers it employs.
He is a busy man and I am sure that he knows when to keep his powder dry.
Thanks,
     GerardM

2009/1/28 Sam Johnston <samj at samj.net>

> Gerard,
> I find your response (which fails to address the issues I have raised)
> abrasive bordering on offensive. I also note that this will not be the
> first
> time *today* that someone has requested that you tone it down. What is
> clear
> though is that we have a snowflake's chance in hell of convincing you there
> is a problem, so I'm going to add you to a large (and growing) list of
> trolls and ignore your 'contributions' from now on.
>
> Presumably WMF has lawyer(s) somewhere. What would be the process of
> getting
> them to take a look at this with a view to having the French chapter put
> into place the requisite disclaimers?
>
> Sam
>
> Lennart: Illegal content results in individuals being pursued, arrested and
> charged and snarky articles being written by old media, not outrageous
> (albeit largely unjustified) claims for damages (and leverage via
> commercial
> third parties):
>
>
> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2008/01/statutory-damages-not-high-enough.ars
>
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Gerard Meijssen
> <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > Hoi,
> > What WMF server allows anonymous uploads of images ? Do you know if this
> > makes any difference any way ? Who do you think you get an invoice from?
> Not
> > the WMF not its chapters. So please THINK
> >
> > Why bother us with such tripe that is irrelevant to the thread anyway ?
> > Thanks,
> >         GerardM
> >
> > 2009/1/28 Sam Johnston <samj at samj.net>
> >
> >> On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 1:21 PM, Andrew Gray <andrew.gray at dunelm.org.uk
> >> >wrote:
> >>
> >> > 2009/1/28 Sam Johnston <samj at samj.net>:
> >> >
> >> > >> Material in the public domain or under a fully free licence does
> not
> >> > >> require any kind of fair use consideration.
> >> > >
> >> > > I'm not talking about genuinely free material, I'm talking about
> >> > protected
> >> > > (copyrighted/trademarked) material being uploaded by others - for
> >> example
> >> > a
> >> > > periodic table of elements or medical charts which would normally be
> >> > subject
> >> > > to deletion (except that they are currently immediately available
> for
> >> > > sale!).
> >> >
> >> > I'm a little confused - surely we would delete this stuff whether or
> >> > not there's a "buy a print now" clickthrough button? I can't see
> >> > anyone arguing to keep it because they want to run off a poster...
> >> >
> >> > (and to a degree this is rendered moot by that helpful "lowest useful
> >> > resolution" requirement of the unfree material rules)
> >> >
> >>
> >> 1. Upload high-resolution copyrighted image littered with trademarks as
> >> anonymous user.
> >> 2. Immediately order poster of said image.
> >> 3. File against WMF, its chapter(s) and the printer for good measure
> >> claiming [RI|MP]AA sized damages for copyright and trademark
> infringement,
> >> submitting said poster(s) and invoice(s) as evidence.
> >> 4. ???
> >> 5. Profit!
> >>
> >> Note that these steps need not necessarily be completed by the same
> >> parties.
> >> I'm not sure that the courts would have much leeway here (as they might
> >> were
> >> the image not used commercially as was the case before this function was
> >> launched).
> >>
> >> Sam
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> foundation-l mailing list
> >> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >>
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l