QUOTE(tarantino @ Sun 12th July 2009, 3:22am)
QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Sun 12th July 2009, 1:04am)
I'm not sure what I think about this case, but a lot of effort has gone into building good relationships with museums lately. For example:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:...us_Views_of_EdoMakes me wonder if the NPG bothered to try to start a conversation with the MWF before sicking the lawyers on them.
You really need to catch up and read
the letter sent to Derrick.
QUOTE
This is a message from Farrer & Co LLP (Ref: JPW/ALM) 66 Lincoln's Inn Fields, London, WC2A 3LH, UK). We are a firm of London based solicitors (lawyers) who act for the National Portrait Gallery in London.
...
Our client contacted the Wikimedia Foundation in April 2009 to request that the images be removed but the Wikimedia Foundation has refused to do so leaving our client with no option but to commence legal proceedings against you personally through the UK Courts.
Not just that, but in the discussion SB links to, a user says to "Please remember the case of the National Portrait Gallery", linking to an
interesting 2008 deletion debate (a result of a user's comprehensive
breakdown of UK law on this point).
The deletion debate was ended by postings by
Godwin and
Jimbo which instructed Commons to treat UK law basically as "copyfraud" to be ignored.
You'll note from Godwin's posting that there was attempted but ignored conversation by the NPG before July 2008.