Throughout 2016, the US Copyright Office has been collecting input on the
DMCA safe harbors. WMF has submitted written comments to the Copyright
Office <https://blog.wikimedia.org/2016/04/06/save-safe-harbors-open-web/>[1]
and participated in in-person discussions
<https://blog.wikimedia.org/2016/06/16/copyright-law/>[2] on this issue.
We're currently in the process of preparing a submission as part of a second
round of Copyright Office comments
<https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/11/08/2016-26904/section-512-study-request-for-additional-comments>,
due in February.[3]
If you have questions about what's going on with the safe harbors or have
suggestions about what we should say in the second round of comments, I
encourage you to start a discussion on the public policy mailing list
<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy>[4] or email me
directly.
- Charles
[1]
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2016/04/06/save-safe-harbors-open-web/
[2]
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2016/06/16/copyright-law/
[3]
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/11/08/2016-26904/section-512…
[4]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy
==
Charles M. Roslof
Legal Counsel
Wikimedia Foundation
croslof(a)wikimedia.org
(415) 839-6885
NOTICE: This message might have confidential or legally privileged
information in it. If you have received this message by accident, please
delete it and let us know about the mistake. As an attorney for the
Wikimedia Foundation, for legal/ethical reasons I cannot give legal advice
to, or serve as a lawyer for, community members, volunteers, or staff
members in their personal capacity. For more on what this means, please see
our legal disclaimer
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Legal_Disclaimer>.
On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Vi to <vituzzu.wiki(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I see, thank you for your explanation, coming from a
civil law system it
sounds pretty weird. Anyway I concur, it's pure madness and some action
must be taken.
Vito
2016-12-19 19:46 GMT+01:00 geni <geniice(a)gmail.com>om>:
On 19 December 2016 at 18:38, Vi to
<vituzzu.wiki(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> I wouldn't call DMCA safe harbor(s) "how Wikipedia is allowed to
exist".
At
a glance I'd say it would (at worst) impact
on some (most) wikis way to
handle copyvios/the thin red line around fair-use, but most of our
ecosystem shouldn't be affected. So, what am I missing?
Without some form of safe harbor the likes of AP and getty would have
a fairly solid case for statutory damages for every single one of
their images uploaded even if we deleted them fairly quickly. We could
probably argue it down to $200 per image but it would still add up.
--
geni
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>