Hi One of those 6 successful DMCA's of 2014 was filed by us. http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/DMCA_India_Against_Corruption_logo
Yet recently when my client, in good faith, reports further infringement of their same logo at Commons village pump, we have a Commons administrator agitating the community against my client. This administrator is self declared on-wiki, on his user page, as an employee of an NGO whose CEO is an infringer of my client's works and has regularly impersonated my client. This administrator is also the Commons OTRS administrator. Not surprisingly my client's OTRS emails have gone unacknowledged with no action taken, and my client's spokesperson was repeatedly insulted and abused on-line at the highly toxic Commons which has become a haven for pirates and infringers. The WMF must urgently install a professional take down system at Commons which is autonomous, ticketed, and with DMCAs as an appellate mechanism. Till then the WMF must also immediately cease advising affected non-users to resolve their infringements with their "communities". BRUENTRUP On 12/14/14, pajz <pajzm...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On 13 December 2014 at 19:46, Bruentrup <claus.bruent...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> WMF must implement a professional ticketed system for media takedowns, >> and DMCAs must be the exception rather than the norm. >> > > hmm, do you have evidence of this? There are often delays when it comes to > acknowledging the receipt of permission statements (due to the high amount > of such emails), but frankly I have never heard of copyright infringement > notices not being processed. From my impression this is one area where we > are particularly swift to react, and respecting third-party copyrights is > one of the cornerstones of the project (incidentally, the original thread > here was started precisely because, supposedly, Commons users take > copyright law too seriously). That doesn't mean there might not be an > outlier occasionally, but almost all of these copyright-related complaints > that I see are dealt with within a few days at the most. (That doesn't, and > shouldn't, mean that everything is acted on just because someone claims > their rights were violated without providing any proof of that claim. In > this case it might be necessary to resort to the DMCA's notice process > since it's the only way to at least expose the claimant to some danger > should his assertion prove untrue.) > > Also, the extremely low number of DMCA take-down requests (see < > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Transparency_Report/DMCA_Takedown_Notices>) > seems to contradict your claim that they are the "norm." It would be highly > implausible that you can run a platform like the Wikimedia projects at 58 > DMCA requests in two years (apparently less than 10/year related to > Commons) unless you have a pretty efficient mechanism apart from that in > place to address such issues. > > Patrik > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
