>> ...a deletion discussion among >> non-professionals is not the proper way to determine the law. > > Neither is the opinion of a legal expert: That's the job of the courts.
Courts are the proper way to determine the law after the fact. But this is a question of determining the law before the fact. Except in very limited situations, courts don't do that. > Commons editors are only trying to weed out copyright infringements without > falling for copyfraud. That is absolutely not true. The deletion policy is much more nuanced than "only trying to weed out copyright infringements". > If non-professional Commons editors shouldn't be deciding which images are > PD, then they shouldn't be deciding which images are copyrighted either, and > not one image should be deleted whatever evidence of its copyrighted status > comes up. I don't think that's acceptable to anyone here. You've made quite a few incorrect assumptions there. Of course Commons editors should be deciding which images are PD. But when there is a dispute, it makes no sense for people who don't even know what a derivative work and an underlying work are, to be discussing the applicable law. Anyway, the deletion process obviously doesn't work. File:"Appreciate America. Come On Gang. All Out for Uncle Sam" (Mickey Mouse)" - NARA - 513869.tif is clearly not public domain. And File:"Appreciate America. Come On Gang. All Out for Uncle Sam" (Mickey Mouse)" - NARA - 513869 - cropped and tidied.png is probably a copyvio. Yet both remain, despite deletion discussions, marked as public domain. (The deletion discussion over the latter is especially humorous.) _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
