That would be wonderful. I imagine we would want to tag the images to
indicate their copyright status in certain jurisdictions, and set up a
mechanism so that projects can define which sorts of images they want to be
able to embed in their local pages, and which they do not want (unless a
locally EDP-compliant tag is attached).
However, that wouldn't improve the URAA situation much. We would still need
to delete clear infringements under the URAA, unless they are covered by
some project's EDP. I guess it would at least reduce the number of
transwiki transfers needed.
On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 12:51 AM, Sam Klein <sjklein(a)hcs.harvard.edu> wrote:
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 6:24 PM, Nathan
<nawrich(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Which led to the thought that hey, what we really
need is a meta-project
for hosting images that is *explicitly* intended to serve the other
projects. We tried this before, right? But maybe this time we make the
meta-project a technical implementation without its own community, where
local uploads can be toggled to make files globally available without
giving some global intermediary the right to turn that toggle off.
I can see every file that is uploaded to any project being available
via some global namespace. Commons as we currently imagine it could
become the core set of "maximally free" images: those "freely reusable
in every jurisdiction".
And there would be a separate threshhold for the rest of the images.
"Covered by at least one project's Exemption Doctrine and tagged as
such; freely reusable in almost all of the world and tagged as illegal
in one or two countries; &c..."
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>