[Foundation-l] Moral rights

[Newyorkbrad]

This thread is at a bit too theoretical a plane for me to follow in detail.
(As it happens, I'm a lawyer, but of course not a French lawyer.)  Can
someone give a specific instance (theoretical or historical) where the
assertion of droit moral as applied to wiki content beyond what is expressly
preserved in the license would actually come up as a practical matter?  In
my experience, most assertions on-wiki of moral rights have been in the
context of editing disputes, but I know there is a deeper philosophical and
legal issue involved here than occasional passing legal threats.

FWIW, there is some discussion of a related issue in an arbitration decision
I wrote (RfAr/Alastair Haines 2).  Basically, what we said was that
submitting one's work to Wikipedia, by the very nature of our collaborative
editing process, means that one is surrendering the ability to preserve the
work intact to a greater extent than by submitting it elsewhere.  If one
believes it's important that one's writing be presented as submitted,
without change, then Wikipedia is not the right forum for it, regardless of
the merits of the content.

Newyorkbrad



On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 8:27 AM, Arlen Beiler <arlenbee at gmail.com> wrote:

> Next thing these people will shutdown wikipedia because the french law says
> impre*scriptible*, and they will say that because wikipedia uses JS and so
> is scriptable, it shouldn't be around. What don't you like about the
> licence
> anyway? It is my opinion that the laws of the most influentual country
> apply
> on the wiki served by it. You can't expect English Wikipedia to respect
> Japanese laws, can you? Probably 90% don't even know Japanese, let alone
> live in Japan. The same goes for French and every other one, though the
> percentages will obviously vary.
>
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Teofilo <teofilowiki at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2011/3/4 Teofilo <teofilowiki at gmail.com>:
> >> 2011/3/4 Teofilo <teofilowiki at gmail.com>:
> >> (...)
> >>> (3) For example Spanish copyright law article 14 "derechos
> >>> irrenunciables e inalienables (...) Exigir el reconocimiento de su
> >>> condición de autor de la obra"
> >>>
> >>> http://civil.udg.es/normacivil/estatal/reals/Lpi.html
> >>>
> >>> They are also provided an international recognition in the Berne
> >>> Convention Article 6bis : "Independently of the author's economic
> >>> rights, and even after the transfer of the said rights, the author
> >>> shall have the right to claim authorship of the work and to object to
> >>> any distortion, mutilation or other modification of, or other
> >>> derogatory action in relation to, the said work, which would be
> >>> prejudicial to his honor or reputation."
> >>>
> >>> http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/berne/trtdocs_wo001.html#P123_20726
> >>>
> >>
> >> See also the Japanese copyright law article 19 "the author shall have
> >> the right to determine whether his true name or pseudonym should be
> >> indicated or not, as the name of the author, on the original of his
> >> work or when his work is offered to or made available to the public.
> >> The author shall have the same right with respect to the indication of
> >> his name when works derived form his work are offered to or made
> >> available to the public"
> >>
> >> http://www.cric.or.jp/cric_e/clj/cl2_1.html#cl2_1+SS2
> >>
> >> coupled together with article 59 "Moral rights of the author shall be
> >> exclusively personal to him and inalienable." Inalienable means they
> >> can't be either sold or waived.": incapable of being alienated,
> >> surrendered, or transferred "
> >> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/inalienable
> >>
> >> http://www.cric.or.jp/cric_e/clj/cl2_2.html#cl2_2+S5
> >>
> >> So it is not just a crazy French or European thing. How can so many
> >> countries' legislatures be wrong ?
> >
> > Until the 2009 license change, there was a narrow path with GFDL,
> > enabling to build Wikipedia in each country without breaking too many
> > laws (1). But with the 2009 license change, WMF is behaving like a
> > bull in a china shop.
> >
> > (1) Even if you did everything right with Moral Rights, the French law
> > is still broken in a couple of places. But this is not a scoop.
> > Remember what Lawrence Lessig said about German law in
> > http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Quarto/2/En-5
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>