[Foundation-l] National Portrait Gallery

[David Gerard]

2009/7/17 John at Darkstar <vacuum at jeb.no>:

> If we forget about politics and who-did-what, what is the common grounds
> between "us" and "them"? To me it seems like they want us to use their
> material, but that they are scared to let go of a possible income. This
> seems fairly similar to the Galleri NOR -case.
> Would it be possible for us to define an acceptable resolution that is
> also acceptable for them? They have a lot more material available and to
> me the whole thing seems to be less than optimum for both parties. They
> want to get the material known, but also have the option to sell high
> resolution versions. We want to illustrate articles, but have no need to
> sell our copies, neither do we need highres versions - we infact
> downsample the versions.


This is in fact an apposite question - Erik has said WMF's in
negotiation with the NPG:

    "Quick note: The National Portrait Gallery contacted us to see if
we can find a compromise regarding the images in question, and we’ve
entered good faith discussions with them. Feel free to point this out
in relevant places."

That's a *really good thing*, because a lawsuit would be stupid for
both of us. And working with people is always better than working
against them.

(The real problem, IMO, is funding - that governments tell galleries
they have to make money from exploiting the works in their possession.
This was barely workable last century, and is increasingly untenable
in this one. This will require working with ministries of culture.)

So: what would everyone here like to see in a compromise, that
addresses the concerns of all sides? What makes the NPG happier and
more secure, and will fly with WMF and with the Wikimedia community?


- d.