Just out of curiosity, if this legislation were to pass in Europe, and
(for example) an American tourist took a photograph of a covered
building in Europe and posted it when he or she arrived back in the
U.S., would it be deleted on the ground that the image was non-free at
the site, or kept on the ground that it was free where it was posted?
Newyorkbrad
On 6/22/15, Fæ <faewik(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 22 June 2015 at 13:17, James Heilman
<jmh649(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Yes I agree an example of what Wikipedia would
look like if this
regulation passed is an excellent idea. Could we base it on the geo
tags?
Geotags on their own would be haphazard apart from certain types of
Wikipedia articles, such as those for notable buildings in Europe,
designed in the mid 20th century onwards. It is possible to put some
SQL queries together like this, but the resulting lists or statistics
would only ever be a small slice of relevant articles that could be
affected.
A simple analysis for Commons can be found at
<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:F%C3%A6#number_of_files_under_FOP.3F>
which gives a sense of size, along with relevant Freedom of Panorama
(FoP) categories. However, as noted there, keep in mind that it is
probable that *most* public domain photographs that in some way rely
on European FoP provisions are not categorized in a way that we can
current track relevance to FoP, so statistics are going to remain less
useful than educated guesstimates.
Fae
--
faewik(a)gmail.com
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>