[Foundation-l] PD-art and official "position of the WMF"

Thu Aug 21 05:37:07 UTC 2008

Among the benefits of  have organized Commons in the US, is that we
can go by US copyright law. The
alternative would be for Commons to adopt the most restrictive
position of any country whatsoever. Given the expansive
meanings of "moral rights", and the impossibility in some countries of
surrendering them, this might make such a project impossible. As
obvious, I am not a lawyer , and I tend to write the way I hope things
will be.

On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 9:54 PM, Robert Rohde <rarohde at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 5:33 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> > In my opinion, this is mistaken on many levels.  Regardless of his
>> > intentions, Erik Möller does not have the authority to speak for the
>> > WMF.  If the board does /intend/ to make this statement, a binding
>> > resolution would be a much better means.
>>
>> I disagree, as a senior member of the foundation (either as a board
>> member or as Vice-ED or whatever his current title is now - I'm not
>> sure when the statement was made), he can certainly act as
>> spokesperson for the foundation. If what he said doesn't fit the
>> foundation's official position then it's an matter for internal
>> disciplinary procedures, but I've seen nothing to suggest he was
>> incorrect.
>
>
>
> For the sake of clarity, the statement being discussed is from July 2008,
> when Erik would already be Deputy Director.
>
> -Robert Rohde
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

-- 
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG