On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 1:08 AM, wrote:
The Right Honourable Mr Godwin:
>>In the world outside this mailing list, the fact that I'm responding to this
>>extent to these criticisms would itself be taken as proof of transparency,
>>not disproof.
> --
Can we please have a page on meta on take down notices and possible
reactions? I only found
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Office_actions
I think that WMF has the duty to inform the communities in a general
way what can be done afterwards a take down.
Regarding the Munich logo mentioned
On 3 June 2010 00:54, Mike Godwin wrote:
> Yes, it is correct that I will comply with a DMCA (or equivalent) takedown
> notice. In this respect, I'm like just about every lawyer everywhere who
> represents a service provider. Perhaps they are all bad lawyers, but at
> least I'm in good company i
On 3 June 2010 00:13, Klaus Graf wrote:
> For me there is no reason to believe that Mr. Godwin is a good lawyer.
>
> If he receives a formal (blah-blah) correct take-down-notice he will
> take OFFICE ACTION.
>
> It was clearly un-lawful to take down the TU Munich logo which isn't
> protectable acc
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 10:56 AM, wrote:
>
> Do we really want every contributor to be an expert in the copyright laws of
> any particular nation that might have a company exerting some obscure claim?
We want every contributor who is going to be submitting non-original
content (whether texts for
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>
> Finally as it seems to be necessary to understand Latin in order to read
> your rant, I want to use that language with "Cave canum". What I know of
> that language is thanks to those fine Gauls immortalised by Underzo and
> Goscinny. Brassica is translated in apekool in m
-Original Message-
From: Mike Godwin
To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Wed, Jun 2, 2010 4:54 pm
Subject: [Foundation-l] Office action
>> It is a shame that WMF hasn't a policy of TRANSPARENCY regarding
>> office actions. The right of the com
my point. That is what's missing from the take-down notice.
-Original Message-
From: Mike Godwin
To: wjhon...@aol.com
Cc: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Wed, Jun 2, 2010 5:24 pm
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Office action
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 5:08 PM, wrote:
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 8:24 PM, Mike Godwin wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 5:08 PM, wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> What harm do you foresee in replacing deleted pages with a declaration like
>> YouTube uses, "This Video has been deleted
>>
>> based on a copyright claim by The Disney Corporation" ? And then
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 5:08 PM, wrote:
>
>
> What harm do you foresee in replacing deleted pages with a declaration like
> YouTube uses, "This Video has been deleted
>
> based on a copyright claim by The Disney Corporation" ? And then an
> extension of "If you believe this is public domain mat
Klaus Graf writes:
For me there is no reason to believe that Mr. Godwin is a good lawyer.
>
I certainly don't require that you believe I'm a good lawyer. I'd be a very
poor lawyer indeed, however, if I invited publishers to embroil us in
expensive copyright lawsuits that we might not win when bot
Hoi,
The question is not so much what you believe but very much the reputation Mr
Godwin has. In my appreciation he has an excellent reputation based on the
many relevant jobs that he has had in the past. There are not many people
who are associated with a "law" that is named after them.
When you
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 7:13 PM, Klaus Graf wrote:
> For me there is no reason to believe that Mr. Godwin is a good lawyer.
>
> If he receives a formal (blah-blah) correct take-down-notice he will
> take OFFICE ACTION.
>
> It was clearly un-lawful to take down the TU Munich logo which isn't
> prot
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 4:13 PM, Klaus Graf wrote:
> For me there is no reason to believe that Mr. Godwin is a good lawyer.
>
> If he receives a formal (blah-blah) correct take-down-notice he will
> take OFFICE ACTION.
>
> It was clearly un-lawful to take down the TU Munich logo which isn't
> prote
On 3 June 2010 00:13, Klaus Graf wrote:
> It was clearly un-lawful to take down the TU Munich logo which isn't
> protectable according German copyright law but WMF has done so.
Of course it is lawful for the WMF to remove something from a WMF
site. It may not be legally necessary, but that doesn'
For me there is no reason to believe that Mr. Godwin is a good lawyer.
If he receives a formal (blah-blah) correct take-down-notice he will
take OFFICE ACTION.
It was clearly un-lawful to take down the TU Munich logo which isn't
protectable according German copyright law but WMF has done so.
It
16 matches
Mail list logo
