Fw: [Intlwiki-l] request for deletion for other language- wikipedias -clarification

From: "Tomos at Wikipedia" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 11:54 AM
Subject: [Intlwiki-l] request for deletion for other language-
wikipedias -clarification


> I think I have to clarify one more thing:
>
> The images, like I mentioned, are symbol marks of Japanese prefectures.
> Copyrightholders of those images, as far as we could figure out, are
> prefectural governments, not the wikipedian who draw and posted them on
> Japanese Wikipedia.

I don't know if that is true. If the symbol or image is being used to
describe the
prefecture there is an argument that the image, as long as it is used for
information
and to give people a better understanding of the prefecture government is
not
being infringed upon, but is part of the information that the article is
providing
to the public informing them of the prefecture.  In Europe many towns have
heraldic designs which are protected by various laws. No one would suggest
that writing an article and have a small thumbnail of the image would be
breaking
any laws.  It is not an attempt to "pass off" the article on Wikipedia as
being
certified or otherwise a representation of that town.  It is just
information that
we all have the right to know about because it is human knowledge. How can
someone prevent the disemination of human knowledge and suggest that the
laws of that place are civilized? As far as I know, Japan is a democracy
where
the rule of law is respected. It is not like Turkmenistan where there are
strict
laws that govern communication or Belarus where criticizing the President
Alexandr Lukashenka is a crime.  Japan is a free and open democratic
society,
it must support the principle that human knowledge and the criticism and
dissemination thereof is protected under all the laws of the land.


> In other words, we are not saying the problem is generic conflict between
> GFDL and Japanese copyright law regarding moral right.

In fact the GFDL does preserve the moral rights of attribution, at least as
it is
interpreted in the Wikimedia universe. If someone copies something that was
published in a moral rights jurisdiction will they be violating moral rights
if
the GFDL only requires the five main

Regarding the right of integrity, well this is also a strawman because there
is
no right to integrity on a wiki.  By definition anything that is submitted
properly
can be "mercilessly re-edited at will". To suggest that someone has a right
to integrity on Wikipedia is not to understand how a wiki works. I doubt
that
any judge in any jurisdiction would say that someone's work submitted to
Wikipedia would have to ONLY be reproduced without change. Remember that
the unaltered version of any contributor's work is always available on the
page history so Wikipedia also maintains the unaletered work, to the extent
that is possible through wiki software.

> Also, I remembered one more reason to consider deletion:
>
> Some prefectural government sites state that those symbols cannot be used
> without their prior permission. They have a form for requesting such
> permission.

There are also many musuems that demand permission to make copies of the
paintings in their collections that are already in the public domain. Anyone
can
demand permission this does not mean that permission is necessary for all
uses. Besides the work is being published in the United States and is thus
under US law, not Japanese law. Japanese law would only apply if someone
forks from Wikipedia or creates other derivative works on a Japanese
server thereby publishing the works in Japan. When you are on a Wikimedia
project, you are in the United States, virtually speaking. That is my
opinion,
anyhow, for whatever it is worth. Remember even though I am a lawyer,
this is not a legal opinion.

Alex R. (en:user:alex756)