[Wikimedia-l] Copyright URAA trolls on Wikimedia Commons

[Thomas Morton]

Well not to get into a whole seperate discussion; but from emails recovered
by prosecutors it seems they knowingly violated the safe harbour provisions
by claiming to copyright holders that they had no access to raw files, when
in fact they did.

Actually, that context does have relevance. To what extent to we balance
the rights of copyright holders against what's best for reusers. And how
does that place us and the foundation legally?

Tom
On 1 Jan 2014 11:33, "Gerard Meijssen" <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hoi,
> What effective claim has been made against Kim Dotcom and, THAT is your
> argument.
> Thanks,
>     GerardM
>
>
> On 1 January 2014 12:21, ??? <wiki-list at phizz.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > On 01/01/2014 07:41, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> >
> >> Hoi,
> >> When you go the way of comparing to Kim Dotcom to make a point, you will
> >> have to recognise that the government has been shown to act illegally.
> >> Consequently your argument is without real merit.
> >> Thanks,
> >>       GerardM
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > The first thing that is wrong with the above is that copyright holders
> are
> > not the Government.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  On 31 December 2013 20:45, ??? <wiki-list at phizz.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >>  On 31/12/2013 15:01, Yann Forget wrote:
> >>>
> >>>  2013/12/31 ??? <wiki-list at phizz.demon.co.uk>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Isn't that the attitude that got Kim Dotcom into trouble?
> >>>>> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/12/us-unveils-the-
> >>>>> case-against-kim-dotcom-revealing-e-mails-and-financial-data/
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> This is a typical trolling. Comparing Megaupload with Wikimedia
> Commons?
> >>>> Don't you have better (constructive) arguments?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>  I'm comparing your attitude that rather than fixing the known
> copyright
> >>> issues upfront one should await complaints before addressing, to be
> >>> similar
> >>> to that exhibited by megaupload. An attitude that is essentially one of
> >>> "We'll get away with it for as long as possible, until someone
> >>> complains."
> >>> Meanwhile falsely advertising that the content is free to use.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request at lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request at lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>