|
The National Portrait Gallery Threatens Litigation, Big Oops for WMF? |
|
|
|
|
Replies
Kato |
|
dhd
Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,521
Joined:
Member No.: 767
|
I heard a Wikipedia Weekly podcast a while back where they discussed a similar incident. The Wikipedio was threatened with legal action for copying photographs of non-copyrighted artwork, but the threat was toothless and merely designed to put people off. The podcast was naturally in favor of the Wikipedio (big free culture activists and all that) and they seemed to agree that the Gallery had no right to threaten to sue over photographs of non-copyrighted material. They seemed to know what they were talking about as well. However, this section of this claim interests me: QUOTE There is a common misconception that, as a result of the decision in Bridgeman v. Corel, copyright can never subsist in a photograph of a painting. That conclusion is erroneous because:
1. the judgment in Bridgeman v. Corel is a decision of the US Courts and therefore, whilst it might amount to a precedent under US law, it has no effect under UK law; and
2. in the UK, whilst the precise circumstances that gave rise to the Bridgeman v. Corel litigation have never been the subject matter of a claim decided before the UK Courts, practicing lawyers and legal academics alike generally agree that under a UK law analysis the judgment in Bridgeman v. Corel is wrong and that copyright can subsist in a photograph of a painting.
For the avoidance of doubt, the allegation of copyright infringement made against you below is an allegation under UK law. Furthermore, we can confirm that every one of the images that you have copied is the product of a painstaking exercise on the part of the photographer that created the image in which significant time, skill, effort and artistry have been employed and that there can therefore be no doubt that under UK law all of those images are copyright works under s.1(1)(a) of the CDPA. Whether the Wikipedios end up being in the clear or not legally, the bolded section (if true), says to me that National Portrait Gallery are morally entitled to press a case. (update) QUOTE(Limey @ Sat 11th July 2009, 3:26am) Naturally some idiot of an admin came along to block the account used to send the email immediately per WP:NLT. Yea... I hadn't read that when I posted the above, and was going to post something similar as a joke, "I bet they block the National Portrait Gallery for making legal threats!" etc. GeorgeWilliamHerbert, the blocking admin, has long been identified here as one of the stupidiest figures Wikipedia has produced. Everything he does is preposterously wrong, and I once advised that his posts should be accompanied by the Laurel and Hardy theme tune.
|
|
|
|
GlassBeadGame |
|
Dharma Bum
Group: Contributors
Posts: 7,919
Joined:
From: My name it means nothing. My age it means less. The country I come from is called the Mid-West.
Member No.: 981
|
QUOTE(Kato @ Fri 10th July 2009, 9:15pm) I heard a Wikipedia Weekly podcast a while back where they discussed a similar incident. The Wikipedio was threatened with legal action for copying photographs of non-copyrighted artwork, but the threat was toothless and merely designed to put people off. The podcast was naturally in favor of the Wikipedio (big free culture activists and all that) and they seemed to agree that the Gallery had no right to threaten to sue over photographs of non-copyrighted material. They seemed to know what they were talking about as well. However, this section of this claim interests me: QUOTE There is a common misconception that, as a result of the decision in Bridgeman v. Corel, copyright can never subsist in a photograph of a painting. That conclusion is erroneous because:
1. the judgment in Bridgeman v. Corel is a decision of the US Courts and therefore, whilst it might amount to a precedent under US law, it has no effect under UK law; and
2. in the UK, whilst the precise circumstances that gave rise to the Bridgeman v. Corel litigation have never been the subject matter of a claim decided before the UK Courts, practicing lawyers and legal academics alike generally agree that under a UK law analysis the judgment in Bridgeman v. Corel is wrong and that copyright can subsist in a photograph of a painting.
For the avoidance of doubt, the allegation of copyright infringement made against you below is an allegation under UK law. Furthermore, we can confirm that every one of the images that you have copied is the product of a painstaking exercise on the part of the photographer that created the image in which significant time, skill, effort and artistry have been employed and that there can therefore be no doubt that under UK law all of those images are copyright works under s.1(1)(a) of the CDPA. Whether the Wikipedios end up being in the clear or not legally, the bolded section (if true), says to me that National Portrait Gallery are morally entitled to press a case. The National Portrait Gallery is a substantial institution with strong equities and much motivation to press this issue. The correspondence seems to me well reasoned, thought out and very detailed. In itself, and taking into account the underlying work and investigation it represents, it already amounts to substantial commitment of legal resources. It is the kind of letter that indicates that the aggrieved party has his ducks in row and could work up pleading in short order. Next comes a round of discovery to WMF and ISP etc needed to name and serve the pseudonym (presumably WMF would also be named.) This does not seem to me to be an idle threat. It might be worth the fight to WMF, represented by EFF or the like, and is certainly worth while for NPG. I doubt that the pseudonym will feel so glad about the experience by the time it's over.
|
|
|
|
No one of consequence |
|
I want to stare at the seaside and do nothing at all
Group: Regulars
Posts: 635
Joined:
Member No.: 1,010
|
QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Sat 11th July 2009, 3:36am) The National Portrait Gallery is a substantial institution with strong equities and much motivation to press this issue. The correspondence seems to me well reasoned, thought out and very detailed. In itself, and taking into account the underlying work and investigation it represents, it already amounts to substantial commitment of legal resources. It is the kind of letter that indicates that the aggrieved party has his ducks in row and could work up pleading in short order. Next comes a round of discovery to WMF and ISP etc needed to name and serve the pseudonym (presumably WMF would also be named.) This does not seem to me to be an idle threat.
It might be worth the fight to WMF, represented by EFF or the like, and is certainly worth while for NPG. I doubt that the pseudonym will feel so glad about the experience by the time it's over.
But the WMF is in the US. Is there such a thing as international civil courts? (I don't think so.) Unless the threatened editor lives in the UK, both he and the WMF would seem to be beyond the NPG's reach. QUOTE(TungstenCarbide @ Sat 11th July 2009, 3:40am) Nah, no moral justification. They might be legally entitled to bring a test case, but under no stretch of the imagination are they morally entitled. The copyrights on those paintings are expired. Nobody looks at them to admire the photographer's skill, and there is no moral justification for making money off the work of some guy who died 300 years ago. The skillful photographer copier angle is a weak technicality that doesn't follow the spirit of copyright law.
That's what Bridgeman is about in the US. The circumstances of Bridgeman have never been litigated in the UK. It is interesting that the letter cites the supposed creative input and skill by the photographer (to exactly reproduce a work of art?) as a way to pre-empt a Bridgeman-like article. It would be lovely if this were litigated in the UK and for the NPG to lose just like Bridgeman did. Copyright protects artistic expression for a limited period of time in order to encourage and monetize such expressions. Copyright was never meant to be permanent. QUOTE(dtobias @ Sat 11th July 2009, 4:07am) Legally, the gallery might be right, at least in the U.K. (though not in the U.S., where the servers and apparently the individual Wikipedian are). Morally, however, I have to side with the "free culture" crowd and oppose efforts by institutions to gain proprietary rights over things whose copyrights are nonexistent or long expired, simply based on their possession of the physical objects and their limiting the ability of outsiders to make photographs or copies of them.
Hear, hear! QUOTE(Peter Damian @ Sat 11th July 2009, 10:10am) QUOTE(TungstenCarbide @ Sat 11th July 2009, 7:09am) It also takes skill and expensive equipment to machine a fine bearing race. That doesn't mean the machinist owns a copyright on it. Why should it be so for a photograph of a masterpiece? 'Creativity' is inherent in copyright law.
Where the hell is NYB when we need him.
No but the company that employs that person owns the copyright. On the supposedly complex legal situation, the letter supposedly from Farrers refers to the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 http://www.england-legislation.hmso.gov.uk...880048_en_2#pt1which says QUOTE Copyright is a property right which subsists in accordance with this Part in the following descriptions of work— (a) original literary, dramatic, musical or artistic works, [...] where "artistic work†means— (a) a graphic work, photograph, sculpture or collage, irrespective of artistic quality," But is a photographic reproduction of a painting "original"? This is the basis for Bridgeman v Corel in the US, and the museum lost. There is no question that in the US, such photographs, no matter how skillfully taken, are not protected. A similar case has not been litigated in the UK, as the letter points out, so the museum is in fact taking some risk here as well.
|
|
|
|
No one of consequence |
|
I want to stare at the seaside and do nothing at all
Group: Regulars
Posts: 635
Joined:
Member No.: 1,010
|
QUOTE(Kato @ Sat 11th July 2009, 12:23pm) QUOTE(No one of consequence @ Sat 11th July 2009, 12:54pm) But the WMF is in the US. Is there such a thing as international civil courts? (I don't think so.) Unless the threatened editor lives in the UK, both he and the WMF would seem to be beyond the NPG's reach.
This is one of my biggest gripes with Wikipedia. What you are advocating is cultural bullying of a publicly owned institution in another country, and then you rush behind the skirts of Uncle Sam when they try to fight back. We've said this many times before, but make no mistake, at the core of Wikipedia lies a radical and essentially right wing agenda to undermine public ownership which ultimately ends up placing knowledge and culture in the hands of private interests. Why is this not a case instead of a publicly owned institution trying to bully a private citizen to protect an illegitimately-claimed financial interest in a piece of public property? Here you have the NPG, supported by UK taxpayers, trying to make money selling reproductions of property that they do not own intellectual property rights to, by virtue of their possession of the original. Isn't The Death of Lord Nelson a British National Treasure? But it should only be available to people who can afford to buy prints?
|
|
|
|
taiwopanfob |
|
Ãœber Member
Group: Regulars
Posts: 643
Joined:
Member No.: 214
|
QUOTE(No one of consequence @ Sat 11th July 2009, 12:37pm) But it should only be available to people who can afford to buy prints? Maybe I should present myself to Disney World, and demand free entrance. How can they possibly sleep at night, knowing they are denying the pinnacle of western culture to millions of children and adults? On the basis of pure economic discrimination? I'm also getting a bit pissed off at the local swimming pool. All those signs about having to shower before entry, restrictions on what I can wear in the pool, what I can do in or around the water. Who the hell do these people think they are? Basically, Kato is dead right here. Proprietary interests are why things are as good as they are around here, and the Free Kulture people are not thinking on a long enough timeline.
|
|
|
|
No one of consequence |
|
I want to stare at the seaside and do nothing at all
Group: Regulars
Posts: 635
Joined:
Member No.: 1,010
|
QUOTE(taiwopanfob @ Sat 11th July 2009, 1:00pm) QUOTE(No one of consequence @ Sat 11th July 2009, 12:37pm) But it should only be available to people who can afford to buy prints? Maybe I should present myself to Disney World, and demand free entrance. How can they possibly sleep at night, knowing they are denying the pinnacle of western culture to millions of children and adults? On the basis of pure economic discrimination? I'm also getting a bit pissed off at the local swimming pool. All those signs about having to shower before entry, restrictions on what I can wear in the pool, what I can do in or around the water. Who the hell do these people think they are? Basically, Kato is dead right here. Proprietary interests are why things are as good as they are around here, and the Free Kulture people are not thinking on a long enough timeline. I'm going to ignore your irrelevant strawman arguments, and instead ask two questions. 1. Should proprietary interests be indefinite, and if so, what distinguishes artistic innovation from technical innovation? Why is it acceptable for the NPG to claim exclusive use to reproduce portraits that are in the public domain, when pharmaceutical companies only get 21 (or 25) years to exclusively market a drug? 2. Can any owner of the original work of art claim a new copyright by making a careful enough reproduction? How about the original motion pictures made by Edison and the Lumière brothers? Here is a wax cylinder recording of a song by Arthur Sullivan, made in 1888. Can the owner of the original cylinder claim a new copyright over the song or the recording, by making a careful reproduction?
|
|
|
|
One |
|
Postmaster General
Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,553
Joined:
Member No.: 4,284
|
QUOTE(No one of consequence @ Sat 11th July 2009, 1:25pm) I'm going to ignore your irrelevant strawman arguments, and instead ask two questions.
1. Should proprietary interests be indefinite, and if so, what distinguishes artistic innovation from technical innovation? Why is it acceptable for the NPG to claim exclusive use to reproduce portraits that are in the public domain, when pharmaceutical companies only get 21 (or 25) years to exclusively market a drug?
Funny that you ignore strawmen by asking one. They aren't claiming that right. They are claiming that the digital photographs they created are theirs; the same photographs that were directly taken from their site. Nothing stops Wikipedia from using an older photograph which may be in the public domain, or even snapping one of their own. Once copyright on these photos expires, they're gone. Jeez. Oh, and this case would be a loser under US law, but I'm not sure why users keep citing US concepts like "sweat of the brow." I have no idea about Britain; maybe they would recognize copyrights in reproductions. Doesn't the EU allow crazy non-original stuff like rights in databases? Might not be as frivolous as folks here seem to think, but I would still bet they lose. Just even money though. Apparently, the WMF has already considered this claim, and might fight it (with publicity): QUOTE To put it plainly, WMF's position has always been that faithful reproductions of two-dimensional public domain works of art are public domain, and that claims to the contrary represent an assault on the very concept of a public domain. If museums and galleries not only claim copyright on reproductions, but also control the access to the ability to reproduce pictures (by prohibiting photos, etc.), important historical works that are legally in the public domain can be made inaccessible to the public except through gatekeepers. WMF has made it clear that in the absence of even a strong legal complaint, we don't think it's a good idea to dignify such claims of copyright on public domain works. And, if we ever were seriously legally challenged, we would have a good internal debate about whether we'd fight such a case, and build publicity around it. This is neither a policy change (at least from WMF's point of view), nor is it a change that has implications for other Commons policies. --Erik Möller 01:34, 25 July 2008 (UTC) This post has been edited by One:
|
|
|
|
Posts in this topic
Limey The National Portrait Gallery Threatens Litigation GlassBeadGame
See the letter issued by solicitors for the UK Na... Limey
Whether the Wikipedios end up being in the clear... Kato
Hopefully, the user involved just deletes all the... EricBarbour Hopefully, the user involved just deletes all the ... Push the button
...a radical and essentially right wing agenda to... Kato
Isn't [url=http://www.npg.org.uk/collections/... GlassBeadGame
[quote name='No one of consequence' post='183073... taiwopanfob
[quote name='taiwopanfob' post='183090' date='Sat... GlassBeadGame March 2009, without our client’s consent, y... taiwopanfob In any event maybe the "free culture" fa... TungstenCarbide
I heard a Wikipedia Weekly podcast a while back w... GlassBeadGame
Nah, no moral justification. They might be [i]le... Sarcasticidealist I'm no expert on copyright but I quit certain ... TungstenCarbide
Nah, no moral justification. They might be [i]l... Kato
I agree, legally speaking.
But think about it -... EricBarbour It takes time and money to produce quality reprodu... Kato
(crap, having trouble finding threads about bad h... TungstenCarbide
I agree, legally speaking.
But think about it ... Peter Damian
You seem to be pouring doubt and scorn on the cla... TungstenCarbide
You seem to be pouring doubt and scorn on the cl... Push the button
Why should it be so for a photograph of a masterp... standixon If I take a photograph, don't I own the copyri... Push the button
If I take a photograph, don't I own the copyr... Kato
Where the hell is NYB when we need him.
NYB is u... TungstenCarbide
[quote name='TungstenCarbide' post='183056' date=... Kato
And the National Gallery is making money off of d... Kato
I suspect that the letter from the NPG's lawy... TungstenCarbide [quote name='TungstenCarbide' post='183289' date='... GlassBeadGame
against someone residing in the US, about server... Peter Damian
It also takes skill and expensive equipment to ma... Push the button
On the supposedly complex legal situation, the le... taiwopanfob
Where's the originality in a photograph which... No one of consequence
Where's the originality in a photograph whic... Peter Damian
No, please see Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Co... taiwopanfob No, please see [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B... TungstenCarbide
It also takes skill and expensive equipment to m... taiwopanfob The national gallery is trying to say the photogra... Kato
[quote name='TungstenCarbide' post='183260' date=... GlassBeadGame
Yes, there is a creativity requirement for copyr... TungstenCarbide
[quote name='TungstenCarbide' post='183260' date=... dogbiscuit
[quote name='Peter Damian' post='183070' date='Sa... Random832 It takes time and money to produce quality reprodu... dogbiscuit
It takes time and money to produce quality reprod... taiwopanfob The other example, say the Boston Pops Orchestra p... Eva Destruction
As also has been pointed out, the WikiMedia licen... Milton Roe
That isn't relevant to this particular case, ... Eva Destruction
[quote name='Eva Destruction' post='183862' date=... One
[quote name='dogbiscuit' post='183852' date='Tue ... Eva Destruction
[quote name='Eva Destruction' post='183862' date=... One
[quote name='One' post='183875' date='Tue 14th Ju... taiwopanfob
Well, the [url=http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/... One
But Jimbo's reading is apparently incomplete.... dogbiscuit
As also has been pointed out, the WikiMedia lice... GlassBeadGame
[quote name='GlassBeadGame' post='183024' date='S... A Horse With No Name
GeorgeWilliamHerbert, the blocking admin, has lo... Jon Awbrey
[quote name='Kato' post='183017' date='Fri 10th J... Random832
Whether the Wikipedios end up being in the clear... Kato
[quote name='Kato' post='183017' date='Sat 11th J... JohnA Its just plagiarism, pure and simple. I bet those ... Limey FWIW. This is being discussed on Commons here: htt... dtobias Legally, the gallery might be right, at least in t... Jon Awbrey
Legally, the gallery might be right, at least in ... thekohser
All the ↑2d8 Libertaters have moved on to ... dogbiscuit
Legally, the gallery might be right, at least in ... Kato
In the UK, institutions like the National Portrai... sbrown Theres the point that aparently theyd gone to the ... Kato Here's the National Portrait Gallery's sta... No one of consequence
Good on them, but...
So, if I am affluent enough... Kato And do you think that people who stage Oscar Wild... Push the button
And do you think that people who stage Oscar Wil... Kato
[quote name='Kato' post='183085' date='Sat 11th J... Push the button
But many of the same moral ambiguities can be app... taiwopanfob NPG's reproductions, no matter how technically... Kato
But many of the same moral ambiguities can be ap... Cla68 I remember a few years ago I was dismayed to find ... No one of consequence
[quote name='No one of consequence' post='183081'... LessHorrid vanU
And do you think that people who stage Oscar Wil... Push the button
The Gallery's image licensing department rai... Peter Damian 'Wanker' Gerard chimes in
http://davidger... dtobias Interesting how to oppose a "right-wing corpo... LessHorrid vanU Thinking about this - and following a comment made... Grep Well this would all be extremely hilarious if it w... taiwopanfob Does Dcoetzee really think WMF will pay for his le... Push the button
Another good question: if Dcoetzee decides he do... MZMcBride Everybody agrees that the original images are in t... taiwopanfob The part I find amusing is that the NPG is deliber... MZMcBride
[quote name='MZMcBride' post='183132' date='Sat 1... taiwopanfob It's a public service. Maybe this is the crux ... Kato
I agree that the National Portrait Gallery should... dtobias Nobody has any business agreeing to things, in a s... Grep
Nobody has any business agreeing to things, in a ... dtobias In the U.S., anything produced by federal governme... tarantino All the NPG images on Commons have been tagged wit... GlassBeadGame
All the NPG images on Commons have been tagged wi... dogbiscuit It strikes me that the fundamental issue that the ... SB_Johnny I'm not sure what I think about this case, but... tarantino
I'm not sure what I think about this case, bu... thekohser
That is too funny. Once again, the Foundation l... zvook
[quote name='SB_Johnny' post='183228' date='Sun 1... The Wales Hunter The bypassing technical measures to obtain the ima... tarantino Lar has removed Dcoetzee's administrator right... taiwopanfob Lar has removed Dcoetzee's administrator right... dogbiscuit
Lar has removed Dcoetzee's administrator righ... Lar
[url=http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=... GlassBeadGame
[url=http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title... One
That wasn't why either.
I doubt that avoid... Lar
[quote name='GlassBeadGame' post='183352' date='S... GlassBeadGame
[quote name='GlassBeadGame' post='183352' date='... Lar
Yes I think I did something wrong with the post b... taiwopanfob I don't think that's true. They said they ... taiwopanfob Smart but wrong, eh? Ok, got it, thanks for cleari... GlassBeadGame
Hmm? He hopes they get medium res version to de... taiwopanfob [quote name='taiwopanfob' post='183337' date='Sun ... Apathetic Don't think I would've uploaded 'em in... GlassBeadGame
Don't think I would've uploaded 'em i... Apathetic
Don't think I would've uploaded 'em ... Cedric
Didn't I read earlier somewhere that NPG was ... taiwopanfob Think about this: why the hell does an online enc... Apathetic
But I have another question: exactly why can... taiwopanfob Well, properly licensed submissions are irrevocabl... Apathetic
Well, properly licensed submissions are irrevocab... taiwopanfob Someone who contributed a lot of useful content mi... tarantino GMaxwell's request pointed out that Dc was bei... Lar
So, where was the community discussion that ended... Cedric I am rather unsure of the strategy behind the lega... Kato
I am rather unsure of the strategy behind the leg... Cedric
I am rather unsure of the strategy behind the le... Kato On the desysopping:
So they've abandoned th... GlassBeadGame There has been difficulty in enforcing UK defamati... Selina http://www.npg.org.uk/about/FAQ/how-much-i...ction... Floydsvoid I'm not a lawyer but I have been on jury duty ... Eva Destruction
Poking around on [url=http://www.npg.org.uk/]http... dogbiscuit
Poking around on [url=http://www.npg.org.uk/]htt... Eva Destruction
[quote name='Eva Destruction' post='183371' date=... Malleus
Assuming I'm right about them having come fro... taiwopanfob On a personal note, I'm pissed off that I have... Milton Roe
Assuming I'm right about them having come fr... Eva Destruction
[quote name='Malleus' post='183395' date='Sun 12t... tarantino
[quote name='Floydsvoid' post='183366' date='Sun ... GlassBeadGame
[quote name='Floydsvoid' post='183366' date='Sun... Floydsvoid
Is it possible that "Dcoetzee" someho... tarantino
Oh, I missed the part about [url=http://www.zoom... Cedric I wonder if this guy is going to get a letter, too... Supine It's probable the letter partly or entirely wa... Peter Damian
The last requirement is perhaps the most bizarre ... Supine
[quote name='Supine' post='183401' date='Sun 12th... taiwopanfob The demand in the letter to "c) permanently d... Supine
All true! There are laws relating to trespass... taiwopanfob
All true! There are laws relating to trespas... GlassBeadGame
The last requirement is perhaps the most bizarre... Lar
Has anyone other than myself (and me only here) e... taiwopanfob
[quote name='GlassBeadGame' post='183408' date='S... Supine
[quote name='Supine' post='183401' date='Sun 12th... GlassBeadGame
[quote name='Supine' post='183401' date='Sun 12t... Supine
Of course to you the lawyers at Farrer & Co ... MZMcBride
Of course to you the lawyers at Farrer & Co a... Giano
Of course to you the lawyers at Farrer & Co ... GlassBeadGame
[quote name='MZMcBride' post='183434' date='Mon 1... dogbiscuit
Jeez, this is a civil matter. No one is going to... One
The last requirement is perhaps the most bizarre ... Supine
[quote name='Supine' post='183401' date='Sun 12th... One
[quote name='Supine' post='183401' date='Sun 12t... quantpole It's hilarious seeing the free speech heroes l... dtobias He might have problems if he gets a default judgme... GlassBeadGame
He might have problems if he gets a default judgm... Kato Wikipedios are doing what Wikipedios do best, they... Nerd
Wikipedios are doing what Wikipedios do best, the... Cedric It keeps getting better and better:
(emphasis h... Kato
Ridiculous.
This emphasises precisely why Wikip... dogbiscuit
It keeps getting better and better:
(emphasis ... Kato
It is really, really simple. It is not about copy... TungstenCarbide
[quote name='dogbiscuit' post='183446' date='Mon ... thekohser
I'm going to take a wild guess here that the ... Kato
"we will fulfil your order"
That's... thekohser
[quote name='thekohser' post='183553' date='Mon 1... Milton Roe
I'm going to take a wild guess here that the... TungstenCarbide Funniest news article title so far - http://www.t... GlassBeadGame
Funniest news article title so far - http://www.... Moulton Good article, but it is imperative that NPG gets s... dtobias
[quote name='TungstenCarbide' post='183584' date=... GlassBeadGame
[quote name='GlassBeadGame' post='183599' date='M... taiwopanfob Gmaxwell sayeth:
Well, no: Dcoetzee is being h... dtobias There are cases where a U.S. court has refused to ... GlassBeadGame
There are cases where a U.S. court has refused to... Daxx
One could argue that this is a civil matter and n... dtobias
Of course, now I'm wondering how someone coul... Obesity Dcoetzee rhymes with goatse.
Coincidence??? YOU D... Cedric Just in case any of you thought that I had already... Supine Oh you're referring to the settlement terms bi... Supine A Foundation-L mailing list post mentions the Apri... dcoetzee Hi all, I took a look over the thread, and althoug... Cedric
Hi all, I took a look over the thread, and althou... GlassBeadGame
Hi all, I took a look over the thread, and althou... Somey ...these images were in fact obtained from the NPG... Milton Roe
The example used by the NPG's Assistant Pictu... Moulton Per your signature, are you still an Administrator... Apathetic
Per your signature, are you still an Administrato... taiwopanfob s/he still has adminship rights at en.wiki, and pr... Malleus
Per your signature, are you still an Administrato... Adambro Hopefully this can get resolved without legal acti... Floydsvoid
I'm inclined to disagree with the NPG on this... Kato In light of this business, the National Portrait G... GlassBeadGame
In light of this business, the National Portrait ... No one of consequence
[quote name='Kato' post='183743' date='Mon 13th J... GlassBeadGame
[quote name='Kato' post='183743' date='Mon 13th ... Nerd
In light of this business, the National Portrait... dogbiscuit Having read the earlier letter, I was struck by th... thekohser
What is absolutely disgraceful is that the NPG is... Gandoman
Link to this "mention", please? Dcoetz... thekohser
[quote name='thekohser' post='183796' date='Tue 1... Milton Roe
ZOMG! They won't allow our hare-brained ... Giano
Having read the earlier letter, I was struck by t... Mathsci
[quote name='dogbiscuit' post='183790' date='Tue ... GlassBeadGame
Having read the [url=http://commons.wikimedia.org... thekohser
The article has its share of inaccuracies (WMF on... Gandoman One thing that has previously been mentioned over ... Cedric The MSM is finally on the story.
EDIT: "A s... Kato
The MSM [url=http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa... taiwopanfob Gerard seems to have tempered his earlier rallying... Moulton The NPG spokesman added: "We haven't actu... dogbiscuit The fundamental issue here is that the UK copyrigh... Apathetic
What is worse, even when some tragedy strikes (an... dogbiscuit
What is worse, even when some tragedy strikes (a... Moulton Dogbiscuit is right. An unethical system is an un... Kato Working with, not against, cultural institutions
... GlassBeadGame
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikip... Cedric
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wiki... Random832 ...offers free access to all visitors.
Yes, for o... thekohser
...offers free access to all visitors.
Yes, for ... dtobias But you've got to admit that the attitude in t... GlassBeadGame
But you've got to admit that the attitude in ... thekohser
...Durova is a bit of a weather vain...
Pun int... GlassBeadGame
...Durova is a bit of a weather vain...
Pun in... dtobias
[quote name='GlassBeadGame' post='183994' date='T... Peter Damian Although major newpapers like the Guardian are cov... MBisanz
Although major newpapers like the Guardian are co... Peter Damian
[quote name='Peter Damian' post='184083' date='We... MBisanz
[quote name='MBisanz' post='184084' date='Wed 15t... Peter Damian
Not sure I agree with exactly how that is worded,... MBisanz
Not sure I agree with exactly how that is worded... No one of consequence I wonder if anyone has actually read the [url=http...
2 Pages 1 2 >
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
| |