[Foundation-l] Bridgeman v. Corel worldwide for Wikimedia Commons - yes or no?

Sat Mar 15 23:25:23 UTC 2008

On Sat, March 15, 2008 18:31, Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> Actually, no. Amsterdam and Korea only host Squid systems, so no data is
>>  uploaded there.
>
> The Squid servers hold cached copies of the data. Exactly whose
> jurisdiction things on the web fall under is very complicated and I've
> never understood it - it's possible Amsterdam or Korea could claim
> jurisdiction. Any Dutch or Korean lawyers on the list?

I was asked at a conference I was speaking at yesterday whether we
(WMF/WMUK) had plans to put servers in the UK (ie squids) and I answered
that we were presently disinclined to do so as various bodies, inc
government ones, have mooted that any cached content on ISP servers is the
responsibility of the ISP and hence we (WMF/WMUK) could be held liable for
the content on a squid, albeit that it is ephemeral. The UK has some of
the, um, 'most problematic' libel laws around and I'm not sure we want to
lead anyone into the temptation of trying to sue us (WMF/WMUK)!

Co-coincidently, I'll be at the National Picture Gallery on Tuesday. Might
see what I can and can't do in there re whether it is possible to take a
photo pf something oneself, so bypassing their current argument that any
photograph must be a copy of their own photograph, hence their copyright
...

Alison