You didn't read my message. With all respect: PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE ARE NO SENSITIVE ISSUES IN THIS CASE which concerns the copyright status of modern German stamps. The office action was a clear mistake and it's not relevant how often office action werde made if WMF's counsel was clearly misleaded. Therefore there is, I repeat this, NO need that I or another German wikipedian contact the counsel. WMF has the duty publicly to discuss the case!
Klaus Graf
Klaus, I do understand your anger, but please, calm down.
Scream will not help your case, and I'm sure that WMF's lawyer or someone from his team will come to give all of us a decent explanation.
If in the end of all, there was a mistake, we can always restore the file. Calm, this is not the end of the world (after all today is 11.11.11 and everyone knows the end of the world is 21.12.12) ;-) _____ *Béria Lima* http://wikimedia.pt/(351) 925 171 484
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos*
On 11 November 2011 21:49, Klaus Graf [email protected] wrote:
You didn't read my message. With all respect: PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE ARE NO SENSITIVE ISSUES IN THIS CASE which concerns the copyright status of modern German stamps. The office action was a clear mistake and it's not relevant how often office action werde made if WMF's counsel was clearly misleaded. Therefore there is, I repeat this, NO need that I or another German wikipedian contact the counsel. WMF has the duty publicly to discuss the case!
Klaus Graf
foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 11 November 2011 16:49, Klaus Graf [email protected] wrote:
You didn't read my message. With all respect: PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE ARE NO SENSITIVE ISSUES IN THIS CASE which concerns the copyright status of modern German stamps. The office action was a clear mistake and it's not relevant how often office action werde made if WMF's counsel was clearly misleaded. Therefore there is, I repeat this, NO need that I or another German wikipedian contact the counsel. WMF has the duty publicly to discuss the case!
Well, given that you've been repeatedly directed to the WMF staff members
who are able to answer your questions, you seem to be working awfully hard at *not* asking the people you've been directed to. Have you even made an attempt to post to Geoff Brigham's MetaWiki talk page? While I cannot speak for the manner in which Geoff would respond to you, I don't think you have grounds to complain that he is not responding to you directly and publicly if you have not contacted him directly and publicly. Here is a link to his Meta talk page: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Geoffbrigham
Risker
* Risker wrote:
Well, given that you've been repeatedly directed to the WMF staff members who are able to answer your questions, you seem to be working awfully hard at *not* asking the people you've been directed to. Have you even made an attempt to post to Geoff Brigham's MetaWiki talk page? While I cannot speak for the manner in which Geoff would respond to you, I don't think you have grounds to complain that he is not responding to you directly and publicly if you have not contacted him directly and publicly.
By the looks of it, the Wikimedia Foundation has received legal advice that the Commons community has an incorrect or incomplete understanding of the legal status of a class of images and deleted some as a result.
What it should have done is inform the community of their reasoning, or inform it that an explanation is forthcoming but delayed, alongside in- formation on possible remedies, like whether hosting the images on the german Wikipedia instead of Commons would be okay, or not, or that they have yet to look into that question. Otherwise it would be putting the members of the community and possibly also the Wikimedia Foundation it- self in legal jeopardy.
Instead it seems to have done nothing to inform the community until it was asked about the matter, and since then could only suggest that any- one who wants details might try e-mailing some address, where they may or may not learn anything which they may or may not share with the rest of the community. Someday. Which even days later has not resulted in any more information, other than that someone asked someone to maybe post somewhere something.
What's not to complain about that? We most likely wouldn't be talking about this if the Foundation had posted "The information on the legal status of some images in this class of images is possibly misleading; based on legal advice, we have decided to remove several images on Commons; our legal counsel is currently working on an explanation that will be posted here, but it may take up to two weeks; please do not restore them on local wikis while we review the situation further" or something along those lines and had linked that in the deletion log summaries. I would think that is what the community expects, and it'd seem telling the Foundation the approach here irritated the community would be the first step towards improving the Foundation's behavior.