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

[Ray Saintonge]

geni wrote:

>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.
>
If you think that youtube and flickr are so much the way to go, by all 
means go ahead; I certainly said nothing about them.and whatever their 
copyright policy may be.  "Caring" (whatever you mean by that) about 
copyright need not imply paranoia that borders on ass-kissing.

>>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.
>
It means that as long as your talking theoretically about images that 
you only hypothesizing your answers have no basis in fact.  Courts like 
to reject cases that are based on hypothetical facts.

Ec