Re: [Wikimediauk-l] No Sanity Clause?
On 10 Feb 2014, at 16:18, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote: As the nomination says, there’s no FOP in France, so pictures of modern buildings in France can’t go on Commons without clear permission… I’m not sure whether that should be an embarrassment for Commons or for the MEPs… ;-) Thanks, Mike On 10 Feb 2014, at 16:11, brian.mcn...@wikinewsie.org wrote: All join in now, ... Head - Desk. Head - Desk. Head - Desk. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:European_Parliament,_Strasbourg You have to be glad that MEPs are not that-likely to click through to images with deletion templates, and then onto this embarrassment. Can someone reason with these Commoners? Please? -- Brian McNeil. Wikinewsie.org ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] No Sanity Clause?
This is just silly. However, being an eternal optimist (stop sniggering at the back) we now have a concrete example for the Free Knowledge Advocacy Group EU to use when demonstrating why there is a clear need for reform to Freedom of Panorama legislation... On 10 February 2014 16:19, Michael Peel michael.p...@manchester.ac.ukwrote: On 10 Feb 2014, at 16:18, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote: As the nomination says, there's no FOP in France, so pictures of modern buildings in France can't go on Commons without clear permission... I'm not sure whether that should be an embarrassment for Commons or for the MEPs... ;-) Thanks, Mike On 10 Feb 2014, at 16:11, brian.mcn...@wikinewsie.org wrote: All join in now, ... Head - Desk. Head - Desk. Head - Desk. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:European_Parliament,_Strasbourg You have to be glad that MEPs are not that-likely to click through to images with deletion templates, and then onto this embarrassment. Can someone reason with these Commoners? Please? -- Brian McNeil. Wikinewsie.org ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk -- Stevie Benton Head of External Relations Wikimedia UK +44 (0) 20 7065 0993 / +44 (0) 7803 505 173 @StevieBenton Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.* ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] No Sanity Clause?
EU reform to Freedom of Panorama legislation strikes me as a remarkably bad idea from a UK perspective. If the french want to limit photos of their buildings that is their problem. The case that the FKAGEU is making is for harmonisation of Freedom of Panorama across the EU at the most free level possible. This would include opening Freedom of Panorama in countries such as France. Which is a good thing. Stevie On 10 February 2014 16:27, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: On 10 February 2014 16:24, Stevie Benton stevie.ben...@wikimedia.org.ukwrote: This is just silly. However, being an eternal optimist (stop sniggering at the back) we now have a concrete example for the Free Knowledge Advocacy Group EU to use when demonstrating why there is a clear need for reform to Freedom of Panorama legislation... EU reform to Freedom of Panorama legislation strikes me as a remarkably bad idea from a UK perspective. If the french want to limit photos of their buildings that is their problem. -- geni ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk -- Stevie Benton Head of External Relations Wikimedia UK +44 (0) 20 7065 0993 / +44 (0) 7803 505 173 @StevieBenton Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.* ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] No Sanity Clause?
I wonder if the immunity of the European Union would preclude any French court from actually limiting the right of the building to be photographed with the Parliament's permission... ? Best regards, Bence On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Michael Peel michael.p...@manchester.ac.uk wrote: On 10 Feb 2014, at 16:27, brian.mcn...@wikinewsie.org wrote: I have here, still pinned to my jacket, a bright-yellow press accreditation card from the EU Parliament. That, quite clearly, and within the guidelines issued to us, covers permission to film, take photos, etc, etc both inside and outside the European Parliament. Send a copy of it to OTRS? Thanks, Mike ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk -- Damokos Bence Wikimédia Magyarország http://wikimedia.hu http://wiki.media.hu/ ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] No Sanity Clause?
On 10 February 2014 16:24, Stevie Benton stevie.ben...@wikimedia.org.ukwrote: This is just silly. However, being an eternal optimist (stop sniggering at the back) we now have a concrete example for the Free Knowledge Advocacy Group EU to use when demonstrating why there is a clear need for reform to Freedom of Panorama legislation... EU reform to Freedom of Panorama legislation strikes me as a remarkably bad idea from a UK perspective. If the french want to limit photos of their buildings that is their problem. -- geni ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] No Sanity Clause?
Could they be uploaded to Wikipedia, instead of Commons? Richard Symonds Wikimedia UK 0207 065 0992 Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.* On 10 February 2014 16:27, brian.mcn...@wikinewsie.org wrote: On 2014-02-10 16:19, Michael Peel wrote: On 10 Feb 2014, at 16:18, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote: On 10 Feb 2014, at 16:11, brian.mcn...@wikinewsie.org wrote: All join in now, ... Head - Desk. Head - Desk. Head - Desk. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_ requests/Files_in_Category:European_Parliament,_Strasbourg You have to be glad that MEPs are not that-likely to click through to images with deletion templates, and then onto this embarrassment. As the nomination says, there's no FOP in France, so pictures of modern buildings in France can't go on Commons without clear permission... I'm not sure whether that should be an embarrassment for Commons or for the MEPs... ;-) I have here, still pinned to my jacket, a bright-yellow press accreditation card from the EU Parliament. That, quite clearly, and within the guidelines issued to us, covers permission to film, take photos, etc, etc both inside and outside the European Parliament. Since the argument for deletion is being based upon French law, it's only the French MEPs who should be *seriously* embarrassed. Although, I am tempted to send this on to Christian Engström as yet-another-stick with which to beat them up about copyright. -- Brian McNeil Wikinewsie.org ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] No Sanity Clause?
On 2014-02-10 16:19, Michael Peel wrote: On 10 Feb 2014, at 16:18, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote: On 10 Feb 2014, at 16:11, brian.mcn...@wikinewsie.org wrote: All join in now, ... Head - Desk. Head - Desk. Head - Desk. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:European_Parliament,_Strasbourg You have to be glad that MEPs are not that-likely to click through to images with deletion templates, and then onto this embarrassment. As the nomination says, there’s no FOP in France, so pictures of modern buildings in France can’t go on Commons without clear permission… I’m not sure whether that should be an embarrassment for Commons or for the MEPs… ;-) I have here, still pinned to my jacket, a bright-yellow press accreditation card from the EU Parliament. That, quite clearly, and within the guidelines issued to us, covers permission to film, take photos, etc, etc both inside and outside the European Parliament. Since the argument for deletion is being based upon French law, it's only the French MEPs who should be *seriously* embarrassed. Although, I am tempted to send this on to Christian Engström as yet-another-stick with which to beat them up about copyright. -- Brian McNeil Wikinewsie.org ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] No Sanity Clause?
On 10 Feb 2014, at 16:27, brian.mcn...@wikinewsie.org wrote: I have here, still pinned to my jacket, a bright-yellow press accreditation card from the EU Parliament. That, quite clearly, and within the guidelines issued to us, covers permission to film, take photos, etc, etc both inside and outside the European Parliament. Send a copy of it to OTRS? Thanks, Mike ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] No Sanity Clause?
On 10 February 2014 16:31, Stevie Benton stevie.ben...@wikimedia.org.ukwrote: EU reform to Freedom of Panorama legislation strikes me as a remarkably bad idea from a UK perspective. If the french want to limit photos of their buildings that is their problem. The case that the FKAGEU is making is for harmonisation of Freedom of Panorama across the EU at the most free level possible. This would include opening Freedom of Panorama in countries such as France. Which is a good thing. And historically it has gone the other way and we ended up with 70 year copyright terms. Through in the moral rights issues in France and I'd say the risk isn't worth taking. -- geni ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] No Sanity Clause?
On 10 February 2014 16:29, Michael Peel michael.p...@manchester.ac.uk wrote: On 10 Feb 2014, at 16:27, brian.mcn...@wikinewsie.org wrote: I have here, still pinned to my jacket, a bright-yellow press accreditation card from the EU Parliament. That, quite clearly, and within the guidelines issued to us, covers permission to film, take photos, etc, etc both inside and outside the European Parliament. Send a copy of it to OTRS? No, please don't, I can give you the answer here rather than on OTRS. A right of the press to report is fine, this does not mean that the resulting photographs can be published as PD/CC-BY and ignore copyright for creative works they happen to reproduce. If you want to change the law in France, then give some money to WMFR's lobbying projects, they do rather a good job of it. Fae ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] No Sanity Clause?
This is a prime example of the sort of things causing editor decline; along with the sort of asshattery which saw Andy Mabbett threatened with a block (on BLP grounds) for creating a one-line stub about an MEP. Given that politicians are a prime target for BLP trolls, it wasn’t unreasonable to ask him to actually get it right IMO. Sadly it can never just be a discussion; someone has to get the tone a bit wrong, Andy has an outburst at them, the rest is history. Lack of FOP sucks!!! Tom ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
