[Foundation-l] [Commons-l] Wikimedia Foundation's help to the projects

[Brad Patrick]

I have put a disclaimer on the page pending development and a larger 
internal discussion about what is or is not a proper position to be 
taken by the Foundation.

Thanks for kicking this off!

-Brad

Yann Forget wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Brad Patrick a écrit :
>   
>> "You took the words right out of my mouth."  Exactly.  For those who
>> want answers,
>> (a) it's complicated
>> (b) the answer is "it depends"
>> (c) there is no "right" answer
>> (d) if there is a "right" answer, it can be challenged
>> (e) no, we aren't going to represent you to fight about it.
>>     
>
> Erik Moeller a écrit :
>   
>> On 12/14/06, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> I don't believe you understand how useful it would be
>>> to just have some one say "That particular case is
>>> unknown.  The most similar case to this is Foobar."
>>> Even if there were a table of questions that people
>>> have asked in the past with yes/no/unknown and no
>>> futher advice would be extremely helpful.  I think it
>>> a false expectation of yours that we are expecting
>>> clearcut answers.  Really we have been mucking through
>>> copyright questions as best we can for some time; we
>>> are all well aware there are often not answers only
>>> arguments.  Just being able to eliminate some
>>> arguments as invalid would be very helpful.
>>>       
>> Aside from the potential issues with the WMF "officially" giving such
>> advice to the communities, Brad (our GC and ED) simply doesn't have
>> the time to do this.
>>     
>
> Obviously I didn't mean that Brad or any professional lawyer paid by the
> Foundation has to write all this. The information has to be put down by
> the wiki editors as usual, but I think that the coordination is to be
> done at the Foundation level, not for each wiki. Then maybe a
> professional lawyer in behalf of the Foundation can give a general
> agreement about the policy, or just say "this is wrong and has to be
> written again". I am not even sure if this last step is necessary or
> possible.
>
>   
>> Let's brainstorm about how we can get juriwiki-l
>> going, i.e. a functioning, community-driven group of advisors with
>> demonstrable legal expertise.
>>
>> At the moment juriwiki-l is configured so that postings from the
>> outside are moderated and replied to by a group of insiders. Is there
>> any real issue, from a legal point of view, with making it a public
>> mailing list? This is perhaps something Brad can answer.
>>     
>
> For what I need, I don't think a mailing list is the answer.
> I think that the information should be on the wiki (probably Meta or
> Commons).
>
> There is already a lot of information about legal issues on different
> wikis [1], so I cannot really buy the idea that legal matters cannot
> generally be written down somewhere. Simply what is already there is not
> enough, and a bit more detailed information is needed.
>
> Ray Saintonge a écrit :
>   
>> It may not always be easy to establish when the picture was taken, or
>> who took it.
>>     
>
> All the above implies that this information is known, obviously. The
> case when this information is unknown will need rules in itself, and it
> may not be the least interesting. Which rules are to be applied when the
> author is not known? when the date is not known? when the place is not
> known? etc.
>
> So I started a stub here. Please help to complete it.
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Copyright_rules
>
> [1] See for example http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Copyright_tags
>
> Regards,
>
> Yann
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>