Scott MacDonald | 20 Mar 17:43 2011

NPG copyright irony

After the confrontation between Derrick Coetzee and the National Portrait
Gallery, I thought people would enjoy this irony.

I wandered on to this page of theirs on John Michael Wright:

http://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/person.php?search=sa&LinkID=mp07767
&role=art&wPage=0

Hm, that description of Wright sounds familiar I though. Unsurprising
really, since *I* wrote it. 

It is taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Michael_Wright which is
mainly my work.

Of course, the only note on the page is C National Portrait Gallery, London
2011. No mention of Wikipedia on CC licence unless I've missed it.

Which means, they are engaged in intellectual theft. Or have I missed
something?

Can I sue them? And they seem to have taken other work from Wikipedia. I
wonder if this is quite deliberate.

Scott

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
(Continue reading)

geni | 20 Mar 18:02 2011
Picon

Re: NPG copyright irony

On 20 March 2011 16:43, Scott MacDonald <doc.wikipedia <at> ntlworld.com> wrote:
> Can I sue them?

Sure . However under UK law which means you can only sue for actual
damages. Which in this case is likely to be limited. In reality if you
made enough threats you might get a few £ of out of them at which
point any further action on your part would land you with very large
legal bills.

--

-- 
geni

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Scott MacDonald | 20 Mar 18:04 2011

Re: NPG copyright irony

Alternatively, I could make a gift of my intellectual property on that
article to Derrick Coetzee :)

-----Original Message-----
From: wikien-l-bounces <at> lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikien-l-bounces <at> lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of geni
Sent: 20 March 2011 17:03
To: English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] NPG copyright irony

On 20 March 2011 16:43, Scott MacDonald <doc.wikipedia <at> ntlworld.com> wrote:
> Can I sue them?

Sure . However under UK law which means you can only sue for actual
damages. Which in this case is likely to be limited. In reality if you
made enough threats you might get a few £ of out of them at which
point any further action on your part would land you with very large
legal bills.

--

-- 
geni

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
(Continue reading)

Carcharoth | 20 Mar 19:13 2011

Re: NPG copyright irony

It is possible they have used that text from someone else who has
taken it from Wikipedia. I sometimes find this in the line of work I
do, where people submit information on the items they submit to us
(with no indication of where this information has come from), and I
then double-check and sometimes find they have copied direct from
Wikipedia. It is how information can spread, sometimes. In this case,
of course, you would expect the curators of the NPG to do their own
research. One thing you (Scott) would need to check is precisely where
the sentences in the lead of the article came from and when they were
written.

I've been flicking forward from the initial version of the article here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Michael_Wright&oldid=180342440

It is clear that the current lead emerges gradually over time, with
changes in wording over time. You would need to identify the point in
times at which the word structure of the current sentences emerge and
who wrote them. Given that others have contributed to this article,
you would need to be sure that they did not contribute to the wording
of the copied text. If they did contribute, you would need to work
together with them on what action (if any) to take.

Carcharoth

On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 4:43 PM, Scott MacDonald
<doc.wikipedia <at> ntlworld.com> wrote:
> After the confrontation between Derrick Coetzee and the National Portrait
> Gallery, I thought people would enjoy this irony.
>
(Continue reading)

David Gerard | 20 Mar 21:38 2011
Picon

Re: NPG copyright irony

On 20 March 2011 18:13, Carcharoth <carcharothwp <at> googlemail.com> wrote:

> You would need to identify the point in
> times at which the word structure of the current sentences emerge and
> who wrote them. Given that others have contributed to this article,
> you would need to be sure that they did not contribute to the wording
> of the copied text. If they did contribute, you would need to work
> together with them on what action (if any) to take.

There are other approaches, of course, than that of full-frontal
action for copyright violation.

The first thing is likely to be to quietly approach them and ask
nicely for licence compliance, since it's really easy. I would
*always* advise this as the first approach to take, since it's the
thing we actually want and we're all really nice and stuff.

(Escalation, should that fail conclusively, would probably usefully
involve the blogosphere and then the media, in that order. This will
then rekindle the debate over enclosure of public domain resources,
which we would want to approach with care so as not to joggle the
elbow of those working productively with pretty much every other
museum in the world, who have all been a lot saner and who we don't
want to frighten unduly. Etc., etc. We *could* make a big public fuss,
but I'm not entirely sure that would actually get us what we want.)

(This does not, of course, in any way say that pissed-off Wikipedia
contributors are not absolutely entitled to be pissed off, especially
considering that the NPG *still* thinks they can enclose the public
domain, and that the NPG's idea of flagging a problem is to start with
(Continue reading)

Scott MacDonald | 20 Mar 21:54 2011

Re: NPG copyright irony

I guess I was mainly enjoying the irony that people so prickly about their
own asserted copyrights can be so slapdash with material that is someone
else's copyright. They threw bricks at Derrick, now it appears they are
inhabiting a glass-house.

I doubt I'm much motivated to do anything about it beyond chuckle with a
little righteous indignation, but if someone else wants either to contact
them and ask them to acknowledge Wikipedia and the correct license, or to
use the whole thing to throw a publicity brick back at them, they are very
welcome. I will chuckle more.

Any way you look at it, they have (probably carelessly) asserted copyright
over material that they certainly do not have copyright over, and (probably
inadvertently) violated my rights and those of Wikipedia. Given the
circumstances, that's somewhat funny.

Scott

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Scott MacDonald | 21 Mar 00:17 2011

Re: NPG copyright irony

I discovered the NPG's infringement after the article [[John Michael
Wright]] was slated for TFA (due in an hour or two). As I say, I wrote 95%
of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Main_Page/Errors#Errors_in_the_summar
y_of_today.27s_or_tomorrow.27s_featured_article

and 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:John_Michael_Wright#CopyVio.3F

The joke is now on me as people actually want to pull the TFA because of a
perception that I violated the NPG's copyright. To say I'm pissed off it to
put it mildly. 

Scott

-----Original Message-----
From: wikien-l-bounces <at> lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikien-l-bounces <at> lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Scott MacDonald
Sent: 20 March 2011 20:54
To: 'English Wikipedia'
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] NPG copyright irony

I guess I was mainly enjoying the irony that people so prickly about their
own asserted copyrights can be so slapdash with material that is someone
else's copyright. They threw bricks at Derrick, now it appears they are
inhabiting a glass-house.

I doubt I'm much motivated to do anything about it beyond chuckle with a
(Continue reading)

Scott MacDonald | 20 Mar 17:43 2011

NPG copyright irony

After the confrontation between Derrick Coetzee and the National Portrait
Gallery, I thought people would enjoy this irony.

I wandered on to this page of theirs on John Michael Wright:

http://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/person.php?search=sa&LinkID=mp07767
&role=art&wPage=0

Hm, that description of Wright sounds familiar I though. Unsurprising
really, since *I* wrote it. 

It is taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Michael_Wright which is
mainly my work.

Of course, the only note on the page is C National Portrait Gallery, London
2011. No mention of Wikipedia on CC licence unless I've missed it.

Which means, they are engaged in intellectual theft. Or have I missed
something?

Can I sue them? And they seem to have taken other work from Wikipedia. I
wonder if this is quite deliberate.

Scott

Scott MacDonald | 20 Mar 18:04 2011

Re: NPG copyright irony

Alternatively, I could make a gift of my intellectual property on that
article to Derrick Coetzee :)

-----Original Message-----
From: wikien-l-bounces <at> lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikien-l-bounces <at> lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of geni
Sent: 20 March 2011 17:03
To: English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] NPG copyright irony

On 20 March 2011 16:43, Scott MacDonald <doc.wikipedia <at> ntlworld.com> wrote:
> Can I sue them?

Sure . However under UK law which means you can only sue for actual
damages. Which in this case is likely to be limited. In reality if you
made enough threats you might get a few £ of out of them at which
point any further action on your part would land you with very large
legal bills.

--

-- 
geni

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Scott MacDonald | 20 Mar 21:54 2011

Re: NPG copyright irony

I guess I was mainly enjoying the irony that people so prickly about their
own asserted copyrights can be so slapdash with material that is someone
else's copyright. They threw bricks at Derrick, now it appears they are
inhabiting a glass-house.

I doubt I'm much motivated to do anything about it beyond chuckle with a
little righteous indignation, but if someone else wants either to contact
them and ask them to acknowledge Wikipedia and the correct license, or to
use the whole thing to throw a publicity brick back at them, they are very
welcome. I will chuckle more.

Any way you look at it, they have (probably carelessly) asserted copyright
over material that they certainly do not have copyright over, and (probably
inadvertently) violated my rights and those of Wikipedia. Given the
circumstances, that's somewhat funny.

Scott


Gmane