Re: Copyrights Permission

From: "Brion Vibber" <[email protected]>
On Dec 8, 2003, at 21:25, Alex R. wrote:
<..snip..>

> > If you go to the image description page:
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Nucleus_ER_golgi.jpg

> That image came from the old article imported from Nupedia (Wikipedia's 
> predecessor). I believe it's by Magnus Manske, based on the talk page:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Endoplasmic_reticulum

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Magnus_Manske

> (Koyannis Qatsi copied the image onto Wikipedia's local storage last 
> year, which is why the upload is marked that way.)

So it seems that it was released by Nupedia under the GFDL.

It is not clear that it was not authored by KQ. Another reason
that doing due dilligence on image uploads is difficult on Wikipedia.
How is a third party, like Doctor Korres supposed to determine,
(1) if the image was submitted to Wikipedia by someone who
had permission of the authors or (2) got it from a GFDL source
or (3) authored it themselves if there is no clear statement on the
image description page?  

Makes me wonder how many images fall into such a gray area.

Regarding copyright permissions is this list the place for people
to make such requests? I guess it is a legal question. Does 
this list interpret the meaning of the GFDL for third parties and
provide them with a binding opinion in that regard?  I can't see
how. This is just a discussion list that anyone can sign on to
discuss legal matters, not to reach legal conclusions or provide
anyone with any kind of statement that might bind the rest of
the Wikipedia community or Wikimedia, the foundation that is
funding the various Wikipedia projects.

Of course that does not stop anyone from commenting on Dr.
Korres questions and trying to help him figure out how he
can answer his own question.

Regarding a GFDL image that is made part of a non-GFDL image,
how could those parts of the image collage taken from other 
non GFDL sources be released under the GFDL if their individual
authors have not given permission to do so?  When parts of an
image combined into a whole are they not one image?  
How can one part of an image have one copyright status when
other parts of the image have a different copyright status?

Just some questions, no answers.

Alex R.