On Jul 27, 2015 5:33 PM, "Robert Rohde" <raro...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 3:59 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > <snip> > > This still leaves me > > wondering if WMF Legal could be involved in the legal defense of the > > reusers if they acted in good faith in attempting to comply with the > > license terms as they understood them on Commons. > > <snip> > > > > Acting in good faith will, at best, mitigate against damages. It isn't > actually a defense against liability. If people are getting sued after > doing absolutely everything right, then I could maybe imagine getting > involved. However, in many licensing disputes there is a legitimate case > that the reuser violated the terms of the license (e.g. by neglecting > details regarding authorship / attribution / etc.), often due to ignorance > of what the license requires. In many such cases, the reuser may well face > a likelihood of losing if the case ever made it to court. In a world of > "good faith" we might expect that reusers who made mistakes out of > ignorance to be treated kindly, but the legal system isn't exactly geared > towards kindness. > > I think that we (the community + the WMF) should do more to help ensure > license compliance and educate reusers about appropriate attribution, etc. > However, I don't think that WMF Legal should get involved in cases where > someone wanted to do the right thing but failed. There is no need to waste > our resources on third-party cases where there is a significant risk of > losing.
Robert, and Jan Bart, what the lawyer did in harald Bischof s Name is something common. There might be hundreds or thousands of cases, and there are maybe the same number of images concerned. Google reveals that lawyers did this on behalf of at least 4 authors in the last 10 years or so. There is no sign that this will stop in future. Therefor allow me come back to my original question which I d love to have an answer from the wmf legal department, and cc-by expert readers: independent of this case, is there a technical possibility to put amateur reusers in future on a safe ground. Without the need of education. By automatically adding author and license info into the metadata of the image. If this is not enough attribution we should strive to have this kind of attribution accepted in a future version cc license. Best Rupert _______________________________________________ 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>
