On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 1:02 AM, Brian J Mingus
wrote:
> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 11:51 PM, Keegan Peterzell >wrote:
>
> > On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 12:33 AM, Brian J Mingus
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > It seems that giving w.net/com/org to the WMF would be in line with
> his
> > > vision of no corporatio
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 11:51 PM, Keegan Peterzell wrote:
> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 12:33 AM, Brian J Mingus
> wrote:
> >
> > It seems that giving w.net/com/org to the WMF would be in line with his
> > vision of no corporation controlling a letter.
> >
> >
> +1 for the idealism, but I'd like to ad
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 12:33 AM, Brian J Mingus
wrote:
>
> It seems that giving w.net/com/org to the WMF would be in line with his
> vision of no corporation controlling a letter.
>
>
+1 for the idealism, but I'd like to add the concept is quite silly if you
consider the bulk of the internet users
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 11:28 PM, Brian wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 11:22 PM, Keegan Peterzell
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 12:15 AM, Liam Wyatt wrote:
>>
>> > With regards to the wi.ki domain, I asked people at the WMF back in
>> 2009
>> > about whether they were interested i
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 11:22 PM, Keegan Peterzell wrote:
> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 12:15 AM, Liam Wyatt wrote:
>
> > With regards to the wi.ki domain, I asked people at the WMF back in 2009
> > about whether they were interested in buying it given that the owner at
> the
> > time had a notice on
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 12:15 AM, Liam Wyatt wrote:
> With regards to the wi.ki domain, I asked people at the WMF back in 2009
> about whether they were interested in buying it given that the owner at the
> time had a notice on the site saying he was willing to sell. The response
> came back that
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 7:20 PM, Martijn Hoekstra
wrote:
> A while back, I think the WMF got offered the enwp.org domain for
> free, which is a fairly oft used shortener. Does anyone remember what
> ever happened to that offer?
I love this service, btw. Thanks for the offer, Thomas.
SJ
___
With regards to the wi.ki domain, I asked people at the WMF back in 2009
about whether they were interested in buying it given that the owner at the
time had a notice on the site saying he was willing to sell. The response
came back that they were concerned it could be problematic since neither the
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 6:20 PM, Martijn Hoekstra wrote:
> A while back, I think the WMF got offered the enwp.org domain for
> free, which is a fairly oft used shortener. Does anyone remember what
> ever happened to that offer?
>
>
This is the thread we're discussing, which began Feb. 16.
--
~K
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 16:09, Ryan Kaldari wrote:
> It's actually even worse than that. Due to the URAA, thousands of works
> which are verifiably public domain in India have had their copyright
> restored in the United States. For example, all of the works of Mahatma
> Gandhi are public domain i
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Waldir Pimenta
>
> So, on one hand I can understand the resistance towards adding even more
> domains to that mix: the enwp.org would set a precedence for others in the
> same vein, and this would mean up to 7 (projects) * ~200 (languages)
> doma
2011/5/10 phoebe ayers :
> Tomorrow (May 11) is another anniversary date: it's been 10 years
> since the first group of non-English Wikipedias came online.
> Originally with spelled-out names rather than language codes, these
> sites were:
[...]
> Happy tenth birthday, Wikipedias! (and many more!)
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 1:15 AM, Waldir Pimenta wrote:
>
> On the other hand, as I said, there are likely more than the 9 .org TLDs I
> mentioned, so there probably is (if not, should be?) an automated system of
> reminders or something to that effect. This system could easily be extended
> to ad
On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Martijn Hoekstra
wrote:
> Back to the issue at hand though: Thomas is (quite generously)
> offering the enwp.org domain. Would the foundation like to have it?
I can only guess that the tech-oriented people don't seem to fancy the idea
much. From this thread we hav
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Martijn Hoekstra
wrote:
> A while back, I think the WMF got offered the enwp.org domain for
> free, which is a fairly oft used shortener. Does anyone remember what
> ever happened to that offer?
Casey has referred that to Rob Halsell.
--
John Vandenberg
___
A while back, I think the WMF got offered the enwp.org domain for
free, which is a fairly oft used shortener. Does anyone remember what
ever happened to that offer?
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 1:07 AM, Waldir Pimenta wrote:
> wi.ki, on the other hand, would be safe in this regard :)
>
> By the way, s
Tomorrow (May 11) is another anniversary date: it's been 10 years
since the first group of non-English Wikipedias came online.
Originally with spelled-out names rather than language codes, these
sites were:
catalan.wikipedia.com
chinese.wikipedia.com
esperanto.wikipedia.com
french.wikipedia.com
de
wi.ki, on the other hand, would be safe in this regard :)
By the way, since no one at WMF offered to send the email requesting a
donation/price reduction of the wi.ki domain, I'll do it as the president of
Wikimedia Portugal, with my @wikimedia.pt email. Hopefully that'll give me
some leverage --
Sorry, change everywhere I said "50" to "60". I can't keep this stuff
straight :P
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote:
> It's actually even worse than that. Due to the URAA, thousands of works
> which are verifiably public domain in India have had their copyright
> restored in the
It's actually even worse than that. Due to the URAA, thousands of works
which are verifiably public domain in India have had their copyright
restored in the United States. For example, all of the works of Mahatma
Gandhi are public domain in India (since he died over 50 years ago),
however, most of
2011/5/10 FT2 :
> Why would the creator's citizenship, or the place of its creation, be
> decisive? The works of an Indian citizen are granted copyright under US law
> in the United States, on a parity with the works of a US or any other
> citizen, even if copyright has expired or still continues
As you say any photograph of a person obviously living, and yet who died
before 1941 is in the Public Domain in India.? This is true regardless of any
other point raised about the source of the photograph as you again say.
The first step is to get agreement on those points for the Indian portio
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Thomas Morton
wrote:
> In a number of years things may change, and ultimately the photo will
> definitely be out of copyright wherever and whenever published though the
> simple passing of time :)
If the US keeps its speed of extending copyright by 20 years in 22
Sreejith's point is that proving the date of authorship in commonly used
religious iconography is difficult; it's also difficult to work through
the dates of derivatives of the 'original' work in order to establish
which versions have what period - if any - of copyright validity left.
For what
Citzenship and where the photo was taken is important *IF* the work is
unpublished. In this case the applicable copyright depends on these things.
On the other hand, wherever it was taken and no matter who took it, if the
image has been published in a jurisdiction then it is subject to copyright
f
Why would the creator's citizenship, or the place of its creation, be
decisive? The works of an Indian citizen are granted copyright under US law
in the United States, on a parity with the works of a US or any other
citizen, even if copyright has expired or still continues in India -- and it
is US
2011/5/10 Strainu :
> 2011/5/10 Sreejith K. :
>> I wonder how the citizenship of the author helps. The only thing that is of
>> importance in a PD claim is the date of first publishing.
>
> Not really. For instance, in Europe the copyright protection runs for
> 70 years from the DEATH of the author
In India the copyright is counted from the year of its first publication.
It's different for different countries. For some countries, the copyright
expiry is counted from the year of death of the author.
Here I was highlighting the difficulties in proving the year of publishing
especially in India
2011/5/10 Sreejith K. :
> I wonder how the citizenship of the author helps. The only thing that is of
> importance in a PD claim is the date of first publishing.
Not really. For instance, in Europe the copyright protection runs for
70 years from the DEATH of the author, not the first publish date.
I wonder how the citizenship of the author helps. The only thing that is of
importance in a PD claim is the date of first publishing.
- Sreejith K.
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 4:37 PM, wrote:
> Welcome to the problem of Orphan Works. what you have to show is that
> either of the following is true?
Welcome to the problem of Orphan Works. what you have to show is that either of
the following is true?
(i) the author of which is a citizen of India; or
(ii) which is first published in India; or
(iii) the author of which, in the case of an unpublished work, is, at the time
of the making of the
Dear All,
I am forwarding the below mail on behalf of a Malayalam wikipedian who is
very active in Wikimedia Commons.
Of late it is becoming very difficult for many Wikimedians from India to
contribute to Wikimedia Commons especially if they are uploading historical
images which are in PD. We ar
32 matches
Mail list logo
