On 2 May 2013 10:54, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2 May 2013 08:37, geni <geni...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 2 May 2013 07:54, Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> If that's it, the law is completely useless, it just parrots general EU > >> regulations. The big question in Europe is what qualifies as a "diligent > >> search": I don't know if as usual UK wants to decide on its own, in any > >> case it would be useful for WMUK to ask a committee or whatever to > assist > >> the Secretary of State in the decision and to be appointed/heard in such > >> committee. Usually they only listen to publishers and sometimes > librarians. > > > The reality is that the law is of no real interest to us since such works > > can't end up under a free license. > > > This is, of course, false. Ridiculous copyright lengths and permission > culture in general are very much a problem for us, and something it's > strongly in our interest to push back on in general. > > However orphan works legislation is a hack designed to allow long copyright terms to keep working without upsetting even more people. Its of no use to us.
-- geni _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
