[Foundation-l] Board meeting in Rotterdam later this week

[geni]

On 1/19/07, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
> Yes, except that I don't see it as unhelpful.

Then youtube and flickr are that way. For the time being this project
will continue to care about copyright to an extent greater than
following DMCA requirements.

> At the same time I do not
> believe that we should be posting indisputably protected random material
> for the sole purpose of getting a reaction from those we already know
> will react adversely.  That would be a wilfull violation.
>

On the part of the uploader yes.

> Talking about the images that we want is the path to talking about what
> is allowed.  If we don't want the image in the first place it doesn't
> matter if it's allowed.  Talking about what is allowed in an empirical
> vacuum is a clear path to unrealistic answers.
>

Could you clarify your point here.


-- 
geni