[WikiEN-l] Upload by default to Commons?

[Gallagher Mark George]

G'day Kirill,

> On 5/3/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 5/3/06, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 5/3/06, Steve Bennett <stevage at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > You make some excellent points. A way of easily migrating 
> free images
> > > > once checked by confirmed users would solve my original 
> problem. Can
> > > > you elaborate on these increasingly stringent demands?
> > >
> > > Aside from the propensity of random people to tag 15th-century
> > > paintings with {{nsd}}? ;-)
> > >
> >
> > If the copy of the painting was made within the uk it is quite 
> posible> it is under copyright. Or at least the copyright status 
> would be
> > rather complex.
> 
> Curious.  I was under the impression that Bridgeman v Corel drew no
> distinction based on where the copy was made (if the copy is accurate,
> how could you tell?), and that _any_ (two-dimensional, slavish, etc.)
> reproduction of a PD artwork was considered PD under US law.

I agree: if a copy is accurate, you couldn't tell.  BUT, that's American law.  If a copy is made in the UK (say by a museum), and the uploader is also a Yukian, could he be held liable by Yukian courts for copyright infringement if the museum claims copyright?

I don't know --- IANAL, IJPOOTV.

-- 
MarkGallagher