QUOTE(dogbiscuit @ Tue 14th July 2009, 5:42am)
What is absolutely disgraceful is that the NPG is quite willing to let its efforts be used for free in a suitable form, but Wikipedia wants more and steals it.
The freedophiles would do well to read the simple examples which make it clear that the NPG are not being unreasonable and not seeking to keep public domain information out of the public domain.
The free culture geeks, though, would have their ears smoking and their heads spinning when they read this line from the NPG's polite and thoughtful letter:
QUOTE
It would also be essential that the image was not "offered" free-of-charge to anyone wishing to use it (under a GNUDFL, Copyleft or similar licence), and that anyone wanting a copy be directed to the NPG website.
ZOMG! They won't allow our hare-brained license onto their work, so that people can mix their images with our library of ejaculation sequences! We must be able to depict a penis splooging on Mary Wollstonecraft! The horrors of limiting mah rights!
QUOTE(Gandoman @ Tue 14th July 2009, 6:02am)
The "conflict of interest" mentioned as a reason for Dcoetzee's desysopping ...
Link to this "mention", please? Dcoetzee hasn't been desysopped, has he?
This post has been edited by thekohser: