date:20090116

Carcharoth wrote:
> The point here is that the availability of PD items (the actual items
> themselves, not the scans or copies of them) varies. There are also
> quality control and provenance issues as well. What would you prefer?
> A quality scan from a respected museum that has confirmed the
> provenance of an item and that it is genuine and not a fake, or a
> poor-quality scan from Joe Blogs who has found stuff in a second-hand
> bookshop and has no weight of authority behind him to confirm that the
> scan or the object are genuine?
>
> The usual solution to that is to point to the museum/library/archive
> image as a way to verify the self-created image (similar to how people
> point to Google Books now to verify books they are using as
> references). But what if there is no museum/library/archive image?
>
>   
I don't worry too much about book scans.  I suppose that a determined 
person could fake these if he had good reason to be so motivated, but 
those circumstances would be a definite exception.  Joe Blogs's scans 
will very often be of poor quality, but where only text is concerned are 
probably suitable to the intended purpose.  Companies like Google are 
getting involved because it's too much for limited library budgets, and 
volunteer help is probably not reliable enough to handle such a huge 
mindless task.  There are further access problems when we are dealing 
with fragile material on acidic paper.  Books that have come out in 
multiple editions present a lot of additional problems about what it 
means to be a genuine.version.

I view the public domain as a trust with the general public as the 
beneficiary.  It is the underlying rationale behind the public ownership 
of US government copyrights, and to free admission to national museums 
in Washington: the taxpayer already paid for all this with his taxes, so 
why should he pay again to see it and use it where possible.

Pointing to Google Books is one thing when our usage does not involve 
changing the material.  If we want to do more with it like producing 
derivatives, we need to host it elsewhere.

This makes me wonder if there is a place at the bailout trough for 
rebuilding the intellectual infrastructure. ;-)

Ec



___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

 
In a message dated 1/16/2009 11:04:45 PM Pacific Standard Time,  
tracy.p...@gmail.com writes:

I don't  see any benefit in attempting to agitate people. Furthermore,
as a student  I was taught to credit my sources, not because it's
legally necessary, but  because it's the appropriate and ethical thing
to do. I have no intention  of compromising on my ethics at  your
goading.>>



---
I'm not asking *you* to it.
The point was raised in this thread, by someone who isn't you, that we  
should feel free to take these images we find on the web of things which are 
PD,  
and do whatever we want to with them, including not giving credit to where we  
got them.
 
That is, in fact, the point of this sub thread on the whole credit  issue.  
So an example where you give credit, doesn't really address  the main point of 
this sub sub sub thread ;)
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009-01-16 Thread Tracy Poff

On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 1:49 AM,   wrote:
> Well perhaps I didn't state that in that particular post, but I have stated
> it a number of times.
>
> People who make a living *by* writing and creating web pages, would often  be
> mollified by being given credit.

The point isn't whether they would be mollified--that implies some
wrong was done. If it's wrong, it's still wrong whether people will
put up with it or not. We shouldn't be doing things that are wrong. I
don't believe that copying that photo was wrong.

> By the way, the example doesn't actually *prove* that she didn't ask for
> consent, but that's a side issue.

Are you accusing me of lying about copying the photo without asking? Really?

And, incidentally, it's 'he'.

> The main issue is really to test the theory by using an image from a site
> where we *know* they will complain isn't it?  I mean there's not much point  
> in
> testing this by  stealing someone's photo who doesn't even notice or  care.

I don't see any benefit in attempting to agitate people. Furthermore,
as a student I was taught to credit my sources, not because it's
legally necessary, but because it's the appropriate and ethical thing
to do. I have no intention of compromising on my ethics at your
goading.

-- 
Tracy Poff

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009-01-16 Thread Wilhelm Schnotz

I don't think we need *consent* to upload stuff that is in the pd...
However crediting the person or source of the image should always be
done just as part of our scholarly ethics.

On 1/17/09, Wilhelm Schnotz  wrote:
> Why would you do that? I mean is it not in scholarly interest to know
> the sources?
>
> On 1/17/09, wjhon...@aol.com  wrote:
>>
>> In a message dated 1/16/2009 10:12:58 PM Pacific Standard Time,
>> tracy.p...@gmail.com writes:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Aphra_Behn_by_Mary_Beale.jpg
>>
>> I  uploaded that a while ago. I stand by my interpretation at the time
>> that my  action was legal and appropriate.>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> And we can see that you give credit to the site from where you took  it.
>> So your example does not pass that test.
>>
>> Would you be willing to load a picture without giving credit to from where
>> you took it?
>>
>>
>> **A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2
>> easy
>> steps!
>> (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
>> cemailfooterNO62)
>> ___
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009-01-16 Thread Wilhelm Schnotz

Why would you do that? I mean is it not in scholarly interest to know
the sources?

On 1/17/09, wjhon...@aol.com  wrote:
>
> In a message dated 1/16/2009 10:12:58 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> tracy.p...@gmail.com writes:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Aphra_Behn_by_Mary_Beale.jpg
>
> I  uploaded that a while ago. I stand by my interpretation at the time
> that my  action was legal and appropriate.>>
>
>
> --
> And we can see that you give credit to the site from where you took  it.
> So your example does not pass that test.
>
> Would you be willing to load a picture without giving credit to from where
> you took it?
>
>
> **A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
> steps!
> (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
> cemailfooterNO62)
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

Well perhaps I didn't state that in that particular post, but I have stated  
it a number of times.
 
People who make a living *by* writing and creating web pages, would often  be 
mollified by being given credit.
 
I don't consider crediting someone the same as stealing the image.   It's 
really a grey area.  Some people don't want you even linking-in their  images 
with or without credit.  Many sites will block that, even for  photographs of 
things in the public domain.  So consider how they would  feel if you simply 
print-screened the photo, and then uploaded it to  commons.
 
By the way, the example doesn't actually *prove* that she didn't ask for  
consent, but that's a side issue.
 
The main issue is really to test the theory by using an image from a site  
where we *know* they will complain isn't it?  I mean there's not much point  in 
testing this by  stealing someone's photo who doesn't even notice or  care.
 
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009-01-16 Thread Tracy Poff

On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 1:26 AM,   wrote:
> And we can see that you give credit to the site from where you took  it.
> So your example does not pass that test.
>
> Would you be willing to load a picture without giving credit to from where
> you took it?

You asked: "Should you be able to take my photograph (without my
consent) and post it  to Commons?" I provided an instance of a
photograph I copied without the photographer's consent and uploaded to
commons. Which is what you wanted. Whether I provided a link back to
the site doesn't affect the legality of the action.

-- 
Tracy Poff

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 10:26 PM,   wrote:
> And we can see that you give credit to the site from where you took  it.
> So your example does not pass that test.
>
> Would you be willing to load a picture without giving credit to from where
> you took it?

I have a feeling that you're changing the terms of the question on us.
 Nowhere in the original did you mention credit.  You mentioned
consent, not credit.  If Tracy Poff did not ask permission, then she
meets your original criteria.

-Matt

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

 
In a message dated 1/16/2009 10:12:58 PM Pacific Standard Time,  
tracy.p...@gmail.com writes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Aphra_Behn_by_Mary_Beale.jpg

I  uploaded that a while ago. I stand by my interpretation at the time
that my  action was legal and appropriate.>>


--
And we can see that you give credit to the site from where you took  it.
So your example does not pass that test.
 
Would you be willing to load a picture without giving credit to from where  
you took it?
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009-01-16 Thread Tracy Poff

On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 12:58 AM,   wrote:
> Are you willing to do it?  That's the next question.
> All of this is academic if there is *no one* willing to test this theory by
> actually executing it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Aphra_Behn_by_Mary_Beale.jpg

I uploaded that a while ago. I stand by my interpretation at the time
that my action was legal and appropriate.

-- 
Tracy Poff

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

 
In a message dated 1/16/2009 9:57:01 PM Pacific Standard Time,  
sainto...@telus.net writes:

Absolutely!>>


 
Are you willing to do it?  That's the next question.
All of this is academic if there is *no one* willing to test this theory by  
actually executing it.
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
> <
> It  would be legitimate if copyright law permitted it.  In that case  it
> likely does not.  What case law we have suggests that photographing  a
> three-dimensional object requires a sufficient amount of creativity  to
> be a copyrightable work. >>
>  
> Fine.  I take a photograph of a page from an old book and post it to  my own 
> web site.
> You take my photograph and post it to commons.
> Now you can't use the 3d argument, so is that a legitimate thing to  do?
> Should you be able to take my photograph (without my consent) and post it  to 
> Commons?
> Answer that.
>   
Absolutely!

Ec

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
> < geni...@gmail.com writes:
>
> We will  deal with that if it happens. For various reasons I strongly
> suspect it  won't.>>
>  
> And yet we already know that you are not willing to do this yourself.
> You just want to convince others to do it :)
> Not really a very defensible position is it?

Whatever someone chooses to upload should be consistent with that 
person's interests and other efforts, and not just for the sake of 
proving that nothing more than that he can do it, or tendentiously 
beggaring your vicarious pleasures.  Your I-dare-you approach is more 
suited to a children's playground.

Ec

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

 
In a message dated 1/16/2009 8:45:57 PM Pacific Standard Time,  
sainto...@telus.net writes:

True  enough, because you can't repeal what was never in the law in the 
first  place.>>


---
Whether or not it was part of Common Law is exactly the issue.
You have to read up on the doctrine here
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweat_of_the_brow_ 
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweat_of_the_brow) 
 
Note how the "doctrine" is viewed in England.  Or at least as  presented here.
It should be apparent that the doctrine was treated as an implicit part of  
US law until recently.
That is why, you see, it wound up at the Supreme Court in the first  place.
To reconcile conflicting issues with the treatment of this implicit  doctrine.
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
> The ruling did *not* repeal sweat-of-the-brow.  
True enough, because you can't repeal what was never in the law in the 
first place.

Ec

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

> "Epistemology" hearkens to the very early days. Nupedia failed because
> of the 7 tenets of proper epistemology.

Not that Epistemia tries to be old-fashioned, though. We _do_
recognise the benefits associated with the collaborative wiki content
production model, and we are quite pragmatic in our approach.

—Thomas Larsen

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

> A noble aim, and I wish you luck. The problem you will face, I think,
> is in being sufficiently better to encourage people to read your
> encyclopaedia despite it being significantly less comprehensive than
> Wikipedia. Without readers, you will find it very hard to attract
> writers (you'll get some, but not enough to get the exponential growth
> that Wikipedia saw for its first few years).

This _is_ an issue. I think we can and will get exponential growth
(although perhaps I'm being too optimistic), but it won't be on
Wikipedia's scale unless something drastic happens.

Thanks for the encouragement, and I invite you to join ...

—Thomas Larsen

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

2009-01-16 Thread Brian

"Epistemology" hearkens to the very early days. Nupedia failed because
of the 7 tenets of proper epistemology.



On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 6:28 PM, Thomas Dalton  wrote:
> 2009/1/17 Carcharoth :
>> On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 1:18 AM, Thomas Larsen
>>  wrote:
>>
>> 
>>
>>> Epistemia aims to provide something better.
>>
>> How did you come up with the name, and what does it mean? :-)
>
> See http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/epistemology
>
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 1:28 AM, Thomas Dalton  wrote:
> 2009/1/17 Carcharoth :
>> On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 1:18 AM, Thomas Larsen
>>  wrote:
>>
>> 
>>
>>> Epistemia aims to provide something better.
>>
>> How did you come up with the name, and what does it mean? :-)
>
> See http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/epistemology

I would have thought metaphysics and ontology are closer to the
philosophical underpinning of an encyclopedia, but I guess it is
harder to come up with names from those (Ontopedia??). The "nature of
knowledge" is a bit different from the actual knowledge itself. It did
get me wondering how catchy the various spin-off names are (I know,
some aren't spin offs):

Infopedia
Wikia
Veropedia
Epistemia
Wikinfo
Citizendium

Seems Wikipedia cornered the market with the most obvious name.

Anyway, best of luck with Epistemia. It is actually rather tempting to
see what it is like to be there on the ground floor constructing the
whole thing from the ground up. Many people missed that back in 2001-3

Carcharoth

PS. It seems I made up Infopedia!

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

2009-01-16 Thread Thomas Dalton

2009/1/17 Carcharoth :
> On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 1:18 AM, Thomas Larsen
>  wrote:
>
> 
>
>> Epistemia aims to provide something better.
>
> How did you come up with the name, and what does it mean? :-)

See http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/epistemology

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 1:18 AM, Thomas Larsen
 wrote:



> Epistemia aims to provide something better.

How did you come up with the name, and what does it mean? :-)

Carcharoth

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

2009-01-16 Thread Thomas Dalton

2009/1/17 Thomas Larsen :
>>> There is no widespread support. There are some people to which you can
>>> say something they don't agree with and back the argument up by saying
>>> it's on Wikipedia, and they will say "Anyone can edit Wikipedia".
>>
>> Have you looked at the donation statistics? And the page view
>> statistics? Plenty of people complain about Wikipedia, but far more
>> people use it and support it on a regular basis.
>
> I think Wikipedia has widespread public support. I, for one, have
> never said that Wikipedia has _not_ had widespread public support.

I know you haven't, but others have.

> Simply because a project has a lot of support, though, does not mean
> that it is by any means perfect or that it has no (serious!) flaws. It
> simply means there's nothing better available.

True.

> Epistemia aims to provide something better.

A noble aim, and I wish you luck. The problem you will face, I think,
is in being sufficiently better to encourage people to read your
encyclopaedia despite it being significantly less comprehensive than
Wikipedia. Without readers, you will find it very hard to attract
writers (you'll get some, but not enough to get the exponential growth
that Wikipedia saw for its first few years).

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

>> There is no widespread support. There are some people to which you can
>> say something they don't agree with and back the argument up by saying
>> it's on Wikipedia, and they will say "Anyone can edit Wikipedia".
>
> Have you looked at the donation statistics? And the page view
> statistics? Plenty of people complain about Wikipedia, but far more
> people use it and support it on a regular basis.

I think Wikipedia has widespread public support. I, for one, have
never said that Wikipedia has _not_ had widespread public support.

Simply because a project has a lot of support, though, does not mean
that it is by any means perfect or that it has no (serious!) flaws. It
simply means there's nothing better available.

Epistemia aims to provide something better.

—Thomas Larsen

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Hacker does not equal Cracker

> In a group dedicated to publishing kludges and various manners of creativity
> with machines (unspecified moderator), that is true. In the popular press,
> of course, since a hacker is human and can be bribed or even supported and
> indoctrinated, crackers are hackers. Hackers are not necessarily crackers.

Hackers aren't crackers, and crackers aren't hackers. Hackers build
things, crackers break things.

—Thomas Larsen

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

> Brittanica financed a study?
> I was under the impression the study was done independently *comparing* us
> to Brittanica.

Sorry, that was my mistake. I meant the Nature study comparing
Wikipedia to Britannica ...

—Thomas Larsen

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 11:55 AM,   wrote:
> And now we see the argument descend into this sort of attack.
> So evidently Geni has nothing left except personal insult.   Nice.

Will, I'm afraid you already descended much of the way yourself.

Perhaps it is time we all disengaged from this argument; I suspect
that you are not going to convince Geni or I, and we are not going to
convince you, and the rest of the audience is likely getting very
bored.

-Matt

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

<>
 
Fine.  I take a photograph of a page from an old book and post it to  my own 
web site.
You take my photograph and post it to commons.
Now you can't use the 3d argument, so is that a legitimate thing to  do?
Should you be able to take my photograph (without my consent) and post it  to 
Commons?
Answer that.
 
Will
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

<>
 
And now we see the argument descend into this sort of attack.
So evidently Geni has nothing left except personal insult.   Nice.
 
Will
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 11:44 AM,   wrote:
> Well it could be that what Geni is advocating is not legal in the US and  the
> fact that Geni is not willing to do it Geni-self might be a good indication
> of that.

Will, it is not reasonable or fair to accuse Geni of lying, which is
what you are thus doing.

To my knowledge Geni has not in this discussion ever advocated that he
or anyone else breach the laws which apply to them, personally.

-Matt

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 11:42 AM,   wrote:
> The question again is not taking a copy of things.  It's taking a copy  of my
> photograph.
> I photograph the Taj Mahal and put it on my own web page.
> You take my copy and post it to Commons.
>
> That's what you want?  That seems legitimate?
> Answer that question.

It would be legitimate if copyright law permitted it.  In that case it
likely does not.  What case law we have suggests that photographing a
three-dimensional object requires a sufficient amount of creativity to
be a copyrightable work.  Thus, you would hold a valid copyright in
that photograph and I would respect the law.

When we're talking about commercial organizations, they will do
anything they are legally permitted to do that will further their
interests.  It is their duty to do so, in fact, if they're a US public
company.  I fail to see why Wikipedia, or other free-content
organizations, or individuals, need to respect some additional moral
imperative you seem to see above and beyond that, when commercial
organizations will not respect any such.

-Matt

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009-01-16 Thread geni

2009/1/16  :
> Well it could be that what Geni is advocating is not legal in the US and  the
> fact that Geni is not willing to do it Geni-self might be a good indication
> of that.
>
> Will

It could be but you would have to overturn a fair bit of caselaw. The
second part of you email however shows that you are either illiterate,
lying or an idiot. It has been explained to you many times that I
answer to UK law which is different in this area.



-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

<>
 
Well it could be that what Geni is advocating is not legal in the US and  the 
fact that Geni is not willing to do it Geni-self might be a good indication  
of that.
 
Will
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

<>
 
The question again is not taking a copy of things.  It's taking a copy  of my 
photograph.
I photograph the Taj Mahal and put it on my own web page.
You take my copy and post it to Commons.
 
That's what you want?  That seems legitimate?
Answer that question.
 
Will
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

<>
 
Your particular item is not PD.  It's the general item, the Socratian  item, 
that is PD.
Your specific item is not. No one can force you to let them view your  item.
If to take an extreme vase, the only versions of the item are privately  
held, and no one has ever photographed it, or if they have all the photographs  
are unpublished etc etc, then right, you can't get the item.
 
Will
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 11:34 AM,   wrote:
> And yet we already know that you are not willing to do this yourself.
> You just want to convince others to do it :)
> Not really a very defensible position is it?

Will, that's quite an unreasonable thing to say.  Geni is a UK
resident.  He must obey UK laws.  Whether or not he agrees with them.
Just because he must obey the laws of the country in which he lives
does not impose on him a moral imperative to never advocate that
people in the US should do things that are legal in the US but not in
the UK.

-Matt

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

<>
 
And yet we already know that you are not willing to do this yourself.
You just want to convince others to do it :)
Not really a very defensible position is it?
 
Will
 
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 11:20 AM,   wrote:
> If we adhere to the idea that any scan of a PD item is a voluntary act to
> freely distribute such scan to the world for any purpose than the end result 
> is
> that the massive scanners will simply stop scanning and we won't have
> anything  free, limited, for pay, or what.

I think you've failed to demonstrate that our taking a copy of things
we're legally allowed to take a copy of is actually harming any of
these organizations, quite apart from any argument about whether we
should actually care.

-Matt

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 7:20 PM,   wrote:
>>>In a message dated 1/16/2009 4:27:00 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
> carcharot...@googlemail.com writes:
>
> The  usual solution to that is to point to the museum/library/archive
> image as a  way to verify the self-created image (similar to how people
> point to Google  Books now to verify books they are using as
> references). But what if there  is no museum/library/archive image?>>
>
> "Point to" versus "take".  Two separate things.

I agree.

> I'm not disputing the right to link to an image on bible.org.  I'm  disputing
> the right to take that image and post it to flicker.com

Ditto.

But you do realise the reason why there is such a thing as "public
domain" in the first place, right? It's a balance between encouraging
free access to public domain material, and discouraging restriction of
access to public domain material.

> And "what if there is no museum image" only means that we are in the same
> position as "what if we have no free image of Britney Spears eating a hot dog
> for our hot dog page??".  I.E. we're not worse off than we've been for five
> thousand years.

I preferred the bible example.

> The mere fact that an image now exists, doesn't mean we get the right to do
> whatever we want with it.

I agree. But you avoided my other question:

If the *object* is public domain, who has the right to access it?

If you buy an expensive first edition public domain book (hundreds of
years old and thousands of US dollars), what do you say to someone who
turns up on your doorstep saying that the book is part of the
collective heritage of humankind, and that they have a right to look
at it and scan it, and that you have no right to keep the item locked
up in a display cabinet for only you to look at?

This is private collections, not museums, but what distinctions should
be drawn? There *are* some private collections of very old material
that are not under government control and are not about to be released
to the public anytime soon. Is this a problem? What can be done about
it?

You talked about capitalism. That creates markets in old stuff. Which
leads to hoarding.

Carcharoth

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009-01-16 Thread geni

2009/1/16  :

> "Point to" versus "take".  Two separate things.
> I'm not disputing the right to link to an image on bible.org.  I'm  disputing
> the right to take that image and post it to flicker.com
>
> And "what if there is no museum image" only means that we are in the same
> position as "what if we have no free image of Britney Spears eating a hot dog
> for our hot dog page??".  I.E. we're not worse off than we've been for five
> thousand years.
>
> The mere fact that an image now exists, doesn't mean we get the right to do
> whatever we want with it.

Under common law we have the right to do anything that is not illegal.

> And the mere fact that no image exists, doesn't mean we get the right to do
> whatever it takes to get one.

We have the right to anything legal to get one.

> We still are ethically bound to follow standard protocol, and not rock the
> image boat.

Not under any of the commonly held systems of ethics within liberal
democracies.

> If we adhere to the idea that any scan of a PD item is a voluntary act to
> freely distribute such scan to the world for any purpose than the end result 
> is
> that the massive scanners will simply stop scanning and we won't have
> anything  free, limited, for pay, or what.

We will deal with that if it happens. For various reasons I strongly
suspect it won't.

-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

>>In a message dated 1/16/2009 4:27:00 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
carcharot...@googlemail.com writes:

The usual solution to that is to point to the museum/library/archive
image as a way to verify the self-created image (similar to how people
point to Google Books now to verify books they are using as
references). But what if there is no museum/library/archive image?>>

"Point to" versus "take". Two separate things.
I'm not disputing the right to link to an image on bible.org. I'm disputing
the right to take that image and post it to flicker.com

And "what if there is no museum image" only means that we are in the same
position as "what if we have no free image of Britney Spears eating a hot dog
for our hot dog page??". I.E. we're not worse off than we've been for five
thousand years.

The mere fact that an image now exists, doesn't mean we get the right to do
whatever we want with it.
And the mere fact that no image exists, doesn't mean we get the right to do
whatever it takes to get one.
We still are ethically bound to follow standard protocol, and not rock the
image boat.

If we adhere to the idea that any scan of a PD item is a voluntary act to
freely distribute such scan to the world for any purpose than the end result is

that the massive scanners will simply stop scanning and we won't have
anything free, limited, for pay, or what.

Shooting yourself in the foot to prove that you can isn't a useful tactic.

Will

**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
steps!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] two-tiered ratings system (Was: To boldy delete what no one had deleted before!)

David Gerard wrote:
> 2009/1/15 Neil Harris:
>   
>> The last time we tried something like this, it degenerated into a
>> massive discussion of which ratings parameters and rating methodology
>> should be used[1], and nothing ever happened.
>> 
> Yes, but that was a side issue - the reason it didn't happen was that
> Brion didn't like the extension to implement it so it fell by the
> wayside.
>
> Your mission, should you choose to accept it:
>
> 0. get Brion and Tim to agree that this is something they wouldn't
> actually be horrified to put on the site if it passed technical muster
> and the community were going "hell yes" loud enough.
> 1. get the community support in place.
> 2. write something for MediaWiki that does this but that Brion and Tim
> would be willing to put on the live servers.
>   

Brion and Tim are reasonable people, and from the technical side are 
likely open to solid arguments that the idea won't cause the system to 
crash or will be reversible if the idea doesn't accomplish its objectives.

Community support is a different matter.  A no-brainer like flagged 
versions has been under discussion for nearly three years, but the 
opponents have developed a huge vocal fan club. I wouldn't want to give 
that crowd any more respect than they deserve.

Parameters and methodology are details that can be adjusted after we 
have more experience with a system. It can be extremely difficult to 
widen the perspective of those who are focused on a narrow subset of the 
issues.  Preconceptions are not a valid substitute for hypothesis testing.

Ec

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] two-tiered ratings system (Was: To boldy delete what no one had deleted before!)

David Gerard wrote:
> 2009/1/15 Ray Saintonge:
>   
>> David Gerard wrote:
>> 
>>> Just ignoring the top and bottom 10% of ratings can do wonders for
>>> this sort of thing, by the way.
>>>   
>> That would work, but may not be necessary if the number of raters is
>> large.  I suspect that the figures with and without truncation will tend
>> to converge. If a rating system of this sort were implemented it should
>> be an easily tested hypothesis.
>> 
> Another idea: make all ratings public information, because they're
> part of the process of working on the encyclopedia so should be
> viewable for transparency.
>   
I don't think it's necessary information, but if that what it takes to 
get a useful system in place, I wouldn't stand in the way.

Ec

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

2009-01-16 Thread Thomas Dalton

2009/1/16 Anthony :
> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 10:58 PM, Thomas Dalton 
> wrote:
>>
>> 2009/1/16 Alvaro García :
>> > There is no widespread support. There are some people to which you can
>> > say something they don't agree with and back the argument up by saying
>> > it's on Wikipedia, and they will say "Anyone can edit Wikipedia".
>>
>> Have you looked at the donation statistics?
>
> $6 million for a top 5 website is a pittance.

$6 million in DONATIONS. Other top 5 sites have large business
incomes, there are no comparable sites in the top 5 so it is
meaningless to try and compare.
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] General versus specific names/scope for articles

2009-01-16 Thread Ian Woollard

On 16/01/2009, brewhaha%40edmc.net  wrote:
> In this matter of choice, I avoid jeneral terms when I can. For example, I
> rarely write "algae", because that could refer to moss that has a solid
> substrate or dissolved phytoplankton. The practical difference is that
> plankton can grow (and consume oxygen in decomposition) a lot faster than
> moss. Other writers figure that they want to, and can safely get rid of,
> both, so they lump it altogether in "algae", a word that I avoid.

But what would you do if you found that the algae article in the
wikipedia had been hijacked by somebody that defined it to be only
dissolve phytoplankton, and two editors were conspiring to ensure that
this never changes; and at least one of the editors teaches people how
to dissolve phytoplankton for a living?

I mean if there's always two editors saying no to everything, then
there's never going to be consensus to change anything in the article
right?
-- 
-Ian Woollard

We live in an imperfectly imperfect world. Life in a perfectly
imperfect world would be much better.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...