On 10 February 2010 02:58, Durova nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com wrote:
But we keep getting editors who use the PD-old template anyway as an
exercise in wishful thinking. Too often, the existence of a valid
copyright is debatable becomes a euphemism for I've got a lousy source and
haven't done
On 10 February 2010 13:21, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk wrote:
I've sometimes thought that, in an ideal world, we should just phase
out PD-old and all its forms - it's often, as you say, wishful
thinking, or sometimes (and I know in my early days I did this) a
cover for a
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 1:26 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 February 2010 13:21, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk wrote:
I've sometimes thought that, in an ideal world, we should just phase
out PD-old and all its forms - it's often, as you say, wishful
thinking, or
Oh, and a current example, if anyone is interested:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#Picture_upload_question
One of the big problems is finding out whether copyright was renewed,
but I'm not sure if the artwork in question was ever published in the
USA anyway. People miss
Hey everyone!
On Friday, Office Hour will be hosted by Mike Godwin, Legal counsel for
the Wikimedia Foundation, who you can read about at
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/User:Mikegodwin
Office hours are from 2330 to 0030 UTC (3:30 PM to 4:30 AM PST).
If you do not have an IRC client,
