[Foundation-l] Agreement between WMF and O'Reilly Media about Wikipedia: The Missing Manual on Wikipedia?

[Mark (Markie)]

thanks

seems to me that they are on images which they own copyright on, so maybe
its just that the files theyve used were from an online version or
something?

On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 8:49 PM, Robert Rohde <rarohde at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wikipedia-The_Missing_Manual_I_mediaobject_d1e29885.png
>
> -Robert Rohde
>
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 12:44 PM, Mark (Markie)
> <newsmarkie at googlemail.com> wrote:
> > i must admit i havent looked closely, but could you give us an example of
> an
> > image where the watermark can be clearly seen and is an issue?
> >
> > regards
> >
> > mark
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 8:36 PM, Chris Down
> > <neuro.wikipedia at googlemail.com>wrote:
> >
> >> Well, either way, there's no harm in asking him to upload ones without
> the
> >> watermark.
> >>
> >> - Chris
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 8:32 PM, Gerard Meijssen
> >> <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hoi,
> >> > As far as I know, Commons has no such thing on watermarking. As
> always,
> >> > come
> >> > up with better illustrations and you can replace them. This is an
> >> > extraordinary situation anyway... Wikipedia has also this other "rule;
> >> > Ignore all rules.. A good one to apply for now.
> >> > Thanks,
> >> >     GerardM
> >> >
> >> > 2009/1/29 Chris Down <neuro.wikipedia at googlemail.com>
> >> >
> >> > > As a note, the images are watermarked, and I have notified the user.
> >> IUP
> >> > > states that this should not occur.
> >> > >
> >> > > - Chris
> >> > >
> >> > > On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 4:15 PM, Thomas Dalton <
> >> thomas.dalton at gmail.com
> >> > > >wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > 2009/1/28 Andrew Whitworth <wknight8111 at gmail.com>:
> >> > > > > Wikipedia would have to write some kind of
> >> > > > > special exception to every rule to allow this book to exist
> there.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > We already have the only exception we need: IAR. (That doesn't
> means
> >> > > > Wikibooks wouldn't handle it better, though!)
> >> > > >
> >> > > > _______________________________________________
> >> > > > 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
> >> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
>