If the Register hates it, that usually indicates to me that it is a fantastic idea. On 02/05/2013 1:07 PM, "shi zhao" <shiz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> see http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/29/err_act_landgrab/ > > The Act contains changes to UK copyright law which permit the > commercial exploitation of images where information identifying the > owner is missing, so-called "orphan works", by placing the work into > what's known as "extended collective licensing" schemes. Since most > digital images on the internet today are orphans - the metadata is > missing or has been stripped by a large organisation - millions of > photographs and illustrations are swept into such schemes. > > For the first time anywhere in the world, the Act will permit the > widespread commercial exploitation of unidentified work - the user > only needs to perform a "diligent search". But since this is likely to > come up with a blank, they can proceed with impunity. The Act states > that a user of a work can act as if they are the owner of the work > (which should be you) if they're given permission to do so by the > Secretary of State. > > The Act also fails to prohibit sub-licensing, meaning that once > somebody has your work, they can wholesale it. This gives the green > light to a new content-scraping industry, an industry that doesn't > have to pay the originator a penny. Such is the consequence of > "rebalancing copyright", in reality. > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l