Mailing List Archive

Agree.

And perhaps other organizations working with copy left licenses could be
informed?



On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 4:20 PM, Teofilo <teofilowiki@gmail.com> wrote:

> The European Commission published in July a "Green Paper - Copyright
> in the Knowledge Economy" (1) .
>
> In §3.4. They talk about the possibility to adapt copyright law so
> that user-created contents would become easier, and they ask to send
> them feedback by 30 November 2008 at markt-d1@ec.europa.eu .
>
> I thought it would be kind of cool if the foundation or the individual
> european chapters would use this opportunity to give them some hints
> of what a Wikipedia-friendly copyright law/directive should look like,
> or a few concrete examples of the worries we are having in present
> time with the current laws. In particular it should be stressed how
> laws in some country lacking a "fair use" restriction for pictures
> and/or without a "panorama freedom" are cumbersome. Non copyright
> issues like the ltalian law on cultural goods should also be
> mentioned.
>
> I am sending the same message on the village pump on Commons :
>
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#European_Commission_Green_Paper_-_Copyright_in_the_Knowledge_Economy
>
>
> (1)
> http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2008:0466:FIN:EN:HTML
> (English)
>
> Other languages are available here :
>
> http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52008DC0466:FR:NOT
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

2008/11/14 Teofilo <teofilowiki@gmail.com>:
> The European Commission published in July a "Green Paper - Copyright
> in the Knowledge Economy" (1) .
>
> In §3.4. They talk about the possibility to adapt copyright law so
> that user-created contents would become easier,

Not really. They want to produce a version of fair use with highly
statute defined boundaries. think south Korean law only more so. Since
such law cannot hope to keep up with advancing technologies it would
likely end up being significantly worse than existing fair dealing and
right of quotation systems.


> and they ask to send
> them feedback by 30 November 2008 at markt-d1@ec.europa.eu .
>
> I thought it would be kind of cool if the foundation or the individual
> european chapters would use this opportunity to give them some hints
> of what a Wikipedia-friendly copyright law/directive should look like,
> or a few concrete examples of the worries we are having in present
> time with the current laws.

Not relevant to the green paper. About the only bit that could
actually have an impact is the orphan works stuff and it would
probably be in our long term interests to oppose the proposed
implementation.

> In particular it should be stressed how
> laws in some country lacking a "fair use" restriction for pictures
> and/or without a "panorama freedom" are cumbersome. Non copyright
> issues like the ltalian law on cultural goods should also be
> mentioned.

I like my freedom of panorama and would rather it be kept well away
from the attention of whoever wrote the mess that is apparently a
green paper.

--
geni

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

2008/11/14 teun spaans <teun.spaans@gmail.com>:
> Agree.
>
> And perhaps other organizations working with copy left licenses could be
> informed?


There is nothing in there of any real significance to free licenses.

--
geni

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 14 Nov 2008, at 15:47, geni wrote:

> 2008/11/14 teun spaans <teun.spaans@gmail.com>:
>> Agree.
>>
>> And perhaps other organizations working with copy left licenses
>> could be
>> informed?
>
>
> There is nothing in there of any real significance to free licenses.

Isn't that something that should be fed back to them, with a question
of why this is?

Mike

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

2008/11/15 Michael Peel <email@mikepeel.net>:
>
> On 14 Nov 2008, at 15:47, geni wrote:
>
>> 2008/11/14 teun spaans <teun.spaans@gmail.com>:
>>> Agree.
>>>
>>> And perhaps other organizations working with copy left licenses
>>> could be
>>> informed?
>>
>>
>> There is nothing in there of any real significance to free licenses.
>
> Isn't that something that should be fed back to them, with a question
> of why this is?

The last thing we want are the EU making any laws with relation to
free licenses. Their approach to copyright is damaging enough without
their active involvement in that area.
--
geni

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Hoi,
When the EU develops a law that deals with copyright and licensing, it will
implicitly include "Free" licenses. It is exactly for this reason that
communities like ours who have at least an idea of what we consider to be
the right way forward are asked to step on the plate. When we, as a
community, do not engage in this request for comments, it is our own damn
fault when the result is not to our liking.

This green paper PROVES that they are actively involved in this area.
Thanks,
GerardM

On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 6:11 PM, geni <geniice@gmail.com> wrote:

> 2008/11/15 Michael Peel <email@mikepeel.net>:
> >
> > On 14 Nov 2008, at 15:47, geni wrote:
> >
> >> 2008/11/14 teun spaans <teun.spaans@gmail.com>:
> >>> Agree.
> >>>
> >>> And perhaps other organizations working with copy left licenses
> >>> could be
> >>> informed?
> >>
> >>
> >> There is nothing in there of any real significance to free licenses.
> >
> > Isn't that something that should be fed back to them, with a question
> > of why this is?
>
> The last thing we want are the EU making any laws with relation to
> free licenses. Their approach to copyright is damaging enough without
> their active involvement in that area.
> --
> geni
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

2008/11/15 Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com>:
> Hoi,
> When the EU develops a law that deals with copyright and licensing, it will
> implicitly include "Free" licenses.

EU backed laws have tended towards incidental hostility to free licenses.

>It is exactly for this reason that
> communities like ours who have at least an idea of what we consider to be
> the right way forward are asked to step on the plate. When we, as a
> community, do not engage in this request for comments, it is our own damn
> fault when the result is not to our liking.
>
> This green paper PROVES that they are actively involved in this area.
> Thanks,
> GerardM

Nope the paper was written with youtube in mind not freely licensed media.

--
geni

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Hi all,

Thanks for sharing this. Wikimedia Nederland is working on a reaction which
has been draft-translated into English as well. We were invited by the Dutch
ministry of legal affairs to give our view on this green paper, to be taken
into account for the national government reaction. We have done this[1],
attended an informal meeting at the ministry with other stakeholder
organisations and were included in the national reaction as well.

We are still working on a reply of our own as well. It will be in Dutch,
companied by an English translation. We have already invited all the other
chapters to send in the translation or a translation of the translation (in
French, Hungarian or Swedish etc) themselves. Even though the odds are small
that the EC will actually listen to us, the consequences are of such serious
nature that we should definitely do whatever we can to help this process
ahead in a positive direction.

You can find the draft reaction and translation of that reaction on the
website of Wikimedia Nederland. The draft [2] (Dutch) has been written after
the meeting at the ministry by some great Wikimedians (Thanks Elly, Esther,
Fruggo, Jose, Marco, Wutsje and others :) ) and is now draft-translated into
English[3]. If you can wait until thursday you can use it under one little
condition: let us know what you do with it :). That is necessary for the
motivation of the volunteers who worked on it, as you might understand :)

We also informed other stakeholder institutions such as CC NL, Stichting
Copyright en Nieuwe Media, Free Knowledge Institute and FSF-Europe. I know
from the Stichting Copyright en Nieuwe Media that they have sent in a reply,
and CC NL and FKI were considering. Unfortunately I heard nothing back from
FSFE.

Copyright is a tough thing, and sometimes, not so often, you have a chance
to change it in a *positive* way. However, it is also an opportunity for
Walt Disney and other copyright holder organisations to try and extend. So
we all might have to step up, and do our best. I don't know how receiving
the EC is towards replies from individuals, but it might definitely be good
to have organisations sign this piece, and send it in! If your chapter is
not working on it, approach the board, and ask them whether they want to do
it, see if you can help them with this hard task.

Bare in mind, the deadline is on November 30.

Best regards,

Lodewijk Gelauff
(board member WMNL)

ps: if you would have read our chapter report two months ago, you would have
known this all already ;-) Join the chapter report-l:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/chapters-reports (no discussion
there, only reports coming in monthly)

[1]: http://nl.wikimedia.org/wiki/Groep_Groenboek/en/Consultation
[2]: http://nl.wikimedia.org/wiki/Groep_Groenboek/Reactie
[3]: http://nl.wikimedia.org/wiki/Groep_Groenboek/en/Reaction

2008/11/14 teun spaans <teun.spaans@gmail.com>

> Agree.
>
> And perhaps other organizations working with copy left licenses could be
> informed?
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 4:20 PM, Teofilo <teofilowiki@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The European Commission published in July a "Green Paper - Copyright
> > in the Knowledge Economy" (1) .
> >
> > In §3.4. They talk about the possibility to adapt copyright law so
> > that user-created contents would become easier, and they ask to send
> > them feedback by 30 November 2008 at markt-d1@ec.europa.eu .
> >
> > I thought it would be kind of cool if the foundation or the individual
> > european chapters would use this opportunity to give them some hints
> > of what a Wikipedia-friendly copyright law/directive should look like,
> > or a few concrete examples of the worries we are having in present
> > time with the current laws. In particular it should be stressed how
> > laws in some country lacking a "fair use" restriction for pictures
> > and/or without a "panorama freedom" are cumbersome. Non copyright
> > issues like the ltalian law on cultural goods should also be
> > mentioned.
> >
> > I am sending the same message on the village pump on Commons :
> >
> >
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#European_Commission_Green_Paper_-_Copyright_in_the_Knowledge_Economy
> >
> >
> > (1)
> >
> http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2008:0466:FIN:EN:HTML
> > (English)
> >
> > Other languages are available here :
> >
> >
> http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52008DC0466:FR:NOT
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

nonsense. There are (small list):

* Creative Commons, dozens of chapters
* Wikimedia, several chapters
* Free Knowledge institute
* Open Office
* Several Linux organisations
* Actually *any* organisation that makes on a large scale freely licensed
manuals etc
* Open Streetmap
* Several libraries (although not directly using, they are on our side
often)
* Free Software Foundation (Europe)
* Several foundations on a more national level such as Vrijschrift and
Stichting Copyright en Nieuwe Media in the Netherlands
and many more...

Lodewijk

2008/11/14 geni <geniice@gmail.com>

> 2008/11/14 teun spaans <teun.spaans@gmail.com>:
> > Agree.
> >
> > And perhaps other organizations working with copy left licenses could be
> > informed?
>
>
> There is nothing in there of any real significance to free licenses.
>
> --
> geni
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

It doesn't really matter what was on their mind, even though I also disagree
on what is on their mind. It matters that the discussion has been broken
open, and that it will be on the agenda of the commission and after that the
parliament. If it is on the agenda, it is time for a little lobby and try to
push *our* points, and let not the discussion be focused on potential 70->90
issues. So there are two reasons even to be involved. To push positive
points, and to prevent negative changes.

Lodewijk

2008/11/15 geni <geniice@gmail.com>

> 2008/11/15 Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com>:
> > Hoi,
> > When the EU develops a law that deals with copyright and licensing, it
> will
> > implicitly include "Free" licenses.
>
> EU backed laws have tended towards incidental hostility to free licenses.
>
> >It is exactly for this reason that
> > communities like ours who have at least an idea of what we consider to be
> > the right way forward are asked to step on the plate. When we, as a
> > community, do not engage in this request for comments, it is our own damn
> > fault when the result is not to our liking.
> >
> > This green paper PROVES that they are actively involved in this area.
> > Thanks,
> > GerardM
>
> Nope the paper was written with youtube in mind not freely licensed media.
>
> --
> geni
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

I am so glad that as soon as someone pops up with some text when asked for
it, that the positive reactions are so overwhelming :) Anyway, the
translation has been proofread, feel free to use etc as explained.

Lodewijk

2008/11/16 effe iets anders <effeietsanders@gmail.com>

> Hi all,
>
> Thanks for sharing this. Wikimedia Nederland is working on a reaction which
> has been draft-translated into English as well. We were invited by the Dutch
> ministry of legal affairs to give our view on this green paper, to be taken
> into account for the national government reaction. We have done this[1],
> attended an informal meeting at the ministry with other stakeholder
> organisations and were included in the national reaction as well.
>
> We are still working on a reply of our own as well. It will be in Dutch,
> companied by an English translation. We have already invited all the other
> chapters to send in the translation or a translation of the translation (in
> French, Hungarian or Swedish etc) themselves. Even though the odds are small
> that the EC will actually listen to us, the consequences are of such serious
> nature that we should definitely do whatever we can to help this process
> ahead in a positive direction.
>
> You can find the draft reaction and translation of that reaction on the
> website of Wikimedia Nederland. The draft [2] (Dutch) has been written after
> the meeting at the ministry by some great Wikimedians (Thanks Elly, Esther,
> Fruggo, Jose, Marco, Wutsje and others :) ) and is now draft-translated into
> English[3]. If you can wait until thursday you can use it under one little
> condition: let us know what you do with it :). That is necessary for the
> motivation of the volunteers who worked on it, as you might understand :)
>
> We also informed other stakeholder institutions such as CC NL, Stichting
> Copyright en Nieuwe Media, Free Knowledge Institute and FSF-Europe. I know
> from the Stichting Copyright en Nieuwe Media that they have sent in a reply,
> and CC NL and FKI were considering. Unfortunately I heard nothing back from
> FSFE.
>
> Copyright is a tough thing, and sometimes, not so often, you have a chance
> to change it in a *positive* way. However, it is also an opportunity for
> Walt Disney and other copyright holder organisations to try and extend. So
> we all might have to step up, and do our best. I don't know how receiving
> the EC is towards replies from individuals, but it might definitely be good
> to have organisations sign this piece, and send it in! If your chapter is
> not working on it, approach the board, and ask them whether they want to do
> it, see if you can help them with this hard task.
>
> Bare in mind, the deadline is on November 30.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Lodewijk Gelauff
> (board member WMNL)
>
> ps: if you would have read our chapter report two months ago, you would
> have known this all already ;-) Join the chapter report-l:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/chapters-reports (no
> discussion there, only reports coming in monthly)
>
> [1]: http://nl.wikimedia.org/wiki/Groep_Groenboek/en/Consultation
> [2]: http://nl.wikimedia.org/wiki/Groep_Groenboek/Reactie
> [3]: http://nl.wikimedia.org/wiki/Groep_Groenboek/en/Reaction
>
> 2008/11/14 teun spaans <teun.spaans@gmail.com>
>
>> Agree.
>>
>>
>> And perhaps other organizations working with copy left licenses could be
>> informed?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 4:20 PM, Teofilo <teofilowiki@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > The European Commission published in July a "Green Paper - Copyright
>> > in the Knowledge Economy" (1) .
>> >
>> > In §3.4. They talk about the possibility to adapt copyright law so
>> > that user-created contents would become easier, and they ask to send
>> > them feedback by 30 November 2008 at markt-d1@ec.europa.eu .
>> >
>> > I thought it would be kind of cool if the foundation or the individual
>> > european chapters would use this opportunity to give them some hints
>> > of what a Wikipedia-friendly copyright law/directive should look like,
>> > or a few concrete examples of the worries we are having in present
>> > time with the current laws. In particular it should be stressed how
>> > laws in some country lacking a "fair use" restriction for pictures
>> > and/or without a "panorama freedom" are cumbersome. Non copyright
>> > issues like the ltalian law on cultural goods should also be
>> > mentioned.
>> >
>> > I am sending the same message on the village pump on Commons :
>> >
>> >
>> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#European_Commission_Green_Paper_-_Copyright_in_the_Knowledge_Economy
>> >
>> >
>> > (1)
>> >
>> http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2008:0466:FIN:EN:HTML
>> > (English)
>> >
>> > Other languages are available here :
>> >
>> >
>> http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52008DC0466:FR:NOT
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > foundation-l mailing list
>> > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l