On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 4:41 AM, birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote:
You must live in a very simplistic world, but I am afraid it does resemble
reality very well. Here are how some various types of things and people are
funded. Tool server=chapter. Developers= Mostly WMF but some chapter.
On 07/26/12 3:51 PM, Anthony wrote:
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 6:23 PM, Ray Saintongesainto...@telus.net wrote:
Copyrights wouldn't apply because you own the copyrights in the pictures you
take.
Maybe. You own the copyright fully if you are the sole contributor of
the creative input which went
On 27/07/12 03:47, birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Jul 26, 2012, at 4:23 AM, wiki-l...@phizz.demon.co.uk wrote:
There is a contractual arrangement between the IOC and the photographer as
specified in terms and conditions on the ticket. If some one makes photos
available commercially then they
On 07/26/12 6:47 PM, birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Jul 26, 2012, at 4:23 AM, wiki-l...@phizz.demon.co.uk wrote:
kikkocrist...@gmail.com wrote:
Sources for the restrictions:
* http://www.tickets.london2012.com/purchaseterms.html
* PDF: http://j.mp/london2012prohibited
I really can't
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
The point really is who actually cares about ArbCom decisions
I am really surprised to see a former member of ArbCom say this. Everybody
on this list cares about ArbCom decisions, most of the time, and so
Irrespectively of the en.wp Arbcom decision (which I do not want to
discuss and I am not qualified to discuss) I think it is a very good
thing that wm.uk issued a statement. I wish other Chapters would follow
the lead, if needed. When Vladimir Medeyko, the president of wm.ru, and,
I believe,
wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 3:35 AM, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote:
I don't see that joint authorship enters into this at all. I think it's safe
to assume that the one holding the camera is the one making the creative
decisions about the photos.
Then
I'm about to video the flypast, outside on the road in my dressing gown.
Does that count as freedom of panorama? ;-)
Richard Symonds, Wikimedia UK
On Jul 27, 2012 3:48 PM, wiki-l...@phizz.demon.co.uk wrote:
wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 3:35 AM, Ray Saintonge
Sounds like you're prepared for some flash photography. Ahem.
On Jul 27, 2012 8:08 PM, Richard Symonds richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk
wrote:
I'm about to video the flypast, outside on the road in my dressing gown.
Does that count as freedom of panorama? ;-)
Richard Symonds, Wikimedia UK
On
Even for the east end of London, I got some odd looks. Video was a but
rubbish, but I tried!
Richard Symonds, Wikimedia UK
On Jul 27, 2012 8:12 PM, Stevie Benton stevie.ben...@wikimedia.org.uk
wrote:
Sounds like you're prepared for some flash photography. Ahem.
On Jul 27, 2012 8:08 PM, Richard
On Jul 27, 2012, at 8:14 AM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 3:35 AM, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote:
I don't see that joint authorship enters into this at all. I think it's safe
to assume that the one holding the camera is the one making the creative
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 6:47 PM, birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Jul 27, 2012, at 8:14 AM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
My advice is that the law isn't that simple, and that blanket
statements of that type are quite often incorrect.
To the degree that we can advise people at all on
*Hi everyone,
It's been a bit since I last emailed this list (or any list, for that
matter!)... you may remember me, I worked at the Foundation last year in
the Community Department, working with Philippe on any number of issues,
as well as with the OTRS team. I've come back to work on a
13 matches
Mail list logo
