[Wikimedia-l] Copyright URAA trolls on Wikimedia Commons

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
26 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Wikimedia-l] Copyright URAA trolls on Wikimedia Commons

Klaus Graf
Can nobody stop the URAA Copyright trolls mass deleting perfect fine files
on Commons?

I think it would be the best if _all_ URAA affected files would be kept
until a DMCA take down notice.

But in the case of in the country of origin PD works which are foreign
government works it is needed that the WMF clearly speaks out that such
works could be accepted on Commons even when a written statement of the
foreign government doesn't exist.

See for Canada's crown copyright

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Burlington_Skyway_1958.png

Klaus Graf
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright URAA trolls on Wikimedia Commons

Fae-3
On 29 Dec 2013 22:43, "Klaus Graf" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Can nobody stop the URAA Copyright trolls mass deleting perfect fine files
> on Commons?
>
> I think it would be the best if _all_ URAA affected files would be kept
> until a DMCA take down notice.

Your proposal would be more useful made with the Commons community rather
than this email list.

Fae
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright URAA trolls on Wikimedia Commons

Philippe Beaudette-3
In reply to this post by Klaus Graf
On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Klaus Graf <[hidden email]>wrote:

> But in the case of in the country of origin PD works which are foreign
> government works it is needed that the WMF clearly speaks out
>

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikilegal/Use_of_Foreign_Works_Restored_under_the_URAA_on_Commons
 <--- like that?

pb


*Philippe Beaudette * \\  Director, Community Advocacy \\ Wikimedia
Foundation, Inc.
 T: 1-415-839-6885 x6643 |  [hidden email]  |  :
@Philippewiki<https://twitter.com/Philippewiki>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright URAA trolls on Wikimedia Commons

metasj
In reply to this post by Fae-3
On Dec 29, 2013 5:51 PM, "Fæ" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On 29 Dec 2013 22:43, "Klaus Graf" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > I think it would be the best if _all_ URAA affected files would be kept
> > until a DMCA take down notice.
>
> Your proposal would be more useful made with the Commons community

Both excellent suggestions.

Sam.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright URAA trolls on Wikimedia Commons

Pierre-Selim
I'm sorry about your problem Klaus, however I think that you won't get
anywhere by calling people trolls.


2013/12/30 Samuel Klein <[hidden email]>

> On Dec 29, 2013 5:51 PM, "Fæ" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > On 29 Dec 2013 22:43, "Klaus Graf" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > I think it would be the best if _all_ URAA affected files would be kept
> > > until a DMCA take down notice.
> >
> > Your proposal would be more useful made with the Commons community
>
> Both excellent suggestions.
>
> Sam.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>



--
Pierre-Selim
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright URAA trolls on Wikimedia Commons

Yann Forget-3
In reply to this post by metasj
Hi,

2013/12/30 Samuel Klein <[hidden email]>

> On Dec 29, 2013 5:51 PM, "Fæ" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > On 29 Dec 2013 22:43, "Klaus Graf" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > I think it would be the best if _all_ URAA affected files would be kept
> > > until a DMCA take down notice.
> >
> > Your proposal would be more useful made with the Commons community
>
> Both excellent suggestions.
>
> Sam.


Are you suggesting that we can keep URAA affected data until we get a
takedown notice?
That's new AFAIK, and many people will be happy if this is accepted by the
WMF.

Regards,

Yann
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright URAA trolls on Wikimedia Commons

Tomasz W. Kozlowski
Yann Forget wrote:

> Are you suggesting that we can keep URAA affected data until we get a
> takedown notice?

He is suggesting that, but apparently without realizing that his
proposal stands in direct contradiction to our precautionary principle
(COM:PRP) and to the way Commons cares about its re-users.

We cannot, will not and do not plan to keep files where there is
significant doubt about their freedom, even if we do not get a takedown
notice from the copyright holders.

           Tomasz

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright URAA trolls on Wikimedia Commons

Gerard Meijssen-3
Hoi Tomasz,

You have a really strong opinion. When you read this thread, you will
notice that it is not appreciated by many and seen as disruptive. Can you
appreciate it in this way?

You argument about re-users is valid when you turn around the argument as
well; as long as we do NOT have a take down notice re-users are better
served by the continuation of the presence of images.
Thanks,
     GerardM


On 30 December 2013 11:31, Tomasz W. Kozlowski <[hidden email]>wrote:

> Yann Forget wrote:
>
>  Are you suggesting that we can keep URAA affected data until we get a
>> takedown notice?
>>
>
> He is suggesting that, but apparently without realizing that his proposal
> stands in direct contradiction to our precautionary principle (COM:PRP) and
> to the way Commons cares about its re-users.
>
> We cannot, will not and do not plan to keep files where there is
> significant doubt about their freedom, even if we do not get a takedown
> notice from the copyright holders.
>
>           Tomasz
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright URAA trolls on Wikimedia Commons

geni
On 30 December 2013 11:26, Gerard Meijssen <[hidden email]>wrote:

> Hoi Tomasz,
>
> You have a really strong opinion. When you read this thread, you will
> notice that it is not appreciated by many and seen as disruptive. Can you
> appreciate it in this way?
>
> You argument about re-users is valid when you turn around the argument as
> well; as long as we do NOT have a take down notice re-users are better
> served by the continuation of the presence of images.
> Thanks,
>      GerardM
>
>
No because then reusers also get hit which a bunch of takedown notices (or
lawsuits) which is decidedly disruptive for them.


--
geni
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright URAA trolls on Wikimedia Commons

Yann Forget-3
2013/12/30 geni <[hidden email]>

> On 30 December 2013 11:26, Gerard Meijssen <[hidden email]
> >wrote:
>
> > Hoi Tomasz,
> >
> > You have a really strong opinion. When you read this thread, you will
> > notice that it is not appreciated by many and seen as disruptive. Can you
> > appreciate it in this way?
> >
> > You argument about re-users is valid when you turn around the argument as
> > well; as long as we do NOT have a take down notice re-users are better
> > served by the continuation of the presence of images.
> > Thanks,
> >      GerardM
> >
> >
> No because then reusers also get hit which a bunch of takedown notices (or
> lawsuits) which is decidedly disruptive for them.
>

This is a falacious argument, because, although these files may not be in
the public domain, nobody really care about URAA.
Except maybe Getty and the like, who can then sell images in the public
domain for ages.

Yann
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright URAA trolls on Wikimedia Commons

Fae-3
If anyone wants to suggest useful changes to Commons guidelines, then this
is a discussion to hold on Commons.

I suspect only a handful of us read this list, and only a few of us have
handled or discussed real URAA cases.

Fae
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright URAA trolls on Wikimedia Commons

Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia)
In reply to this post by geni
I have no role or participation on Commons, but from my work on English WP
I'm aware of the very real copyright status of "free as a practical matter
although someone could theoretically make a disputed technical argument
otherwise."

One solution, where there is a good-faith argument the image is free and no
rights-holder claiming otherwise, would be a disclaimer. Perhaps something
along the lines of "It is believed this image is in the public domain [or,
the status of this image depends on resolution of an open legal issue, or
whatever] and therefore eligible for inclusion on Wikimedia Commons and for
re-use. However, it is possible that the free status of this image could be
disputed because [brief explanation of reason]. Potential re-users should
therefore proceed cautiously."

I hasten to add that this would be appropriate only where the impediment to
freedom is seen as mostly theoretical, not to screw over legitimate claims
by rightsholders or by people with privacy interests implicated by the
image.

Newyorkbrad


On Monday, December 30, 2013, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 30 December 2013 11:26, Gerard Meijssen <[hidden email]
>wrote:
>
>> Hoi Tomasz,
>>
>> You have a really strong opinion. When you read this thread, you will
>> notice that it is not appreciated by many and seen as disruptive. Can you
>> appreciate it in this way?
>>
>> You argument about re-users is valid when you turn around the argument as
>> well; as long as we do NOT have a take down notice re-users are better
>> served by the continuation of the presence of images.
>> Thanks,
>>      GerardM
>>
>>
> No because then reusers also get hit which a bunch of takedown notices (or
> lawsuits) which is decidedly disruptive for them.
>
>
> --
> geni
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright URAA trolls on Wikimedia Commons

Tomasz W. Kozlowski
In reply to this post by Gerard Meijssen-3
Gerard Meijssen wrote:

> You have a really strong opinion. When you read this thread, you will
> notice that it is not appreciated by many and seen as disruptive. Can you
> appreciate it in this way?

No, as the only part where I expressed my opinion was the assumption
that Klaus suggested we only delete files after receiving takedown
notices because he didn't realize it was in direct contradiction to the
precautionary principle. The rest of my e-mail is basically a quote of
that very principle.

I refuse to accept the premise that expressing one's opinion on this
mailing list is not appreciated only because some people might find it
strong (or weak, or whatever), as I believe it to be fundamentally flawed.

I also refuse to accept the suggestion that /my/ opinion (whatever it
might be) is not appreciated "by many" and "seen as disruptive", unless
you can point me to direct evidence that says so -- preferably to
previous posts from this thread.

> You argument about re-users is valid when you turn around the argument as
> well; as long as we do NOT have a take down notice re-users are better
> served by the continuation of the presence of images.

This basically means that we should keep images that violate someone's
copyright as long as we do not receive a takedown notice from them. I
cannot possibly stress enough how bad an idea this is.

           Tomasz

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright URAA trolls on Wikimedia Commons

Fae-3
In reply to this post by Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia)
The URAA is rather more than theoretical. There is more milage  in
developing a defensive approach for orphan works. Again I think an
inclusive discussion on Commons is more useful if anyone intends to
progress this.

Fae
On 30 Dec 2013 14:04, "Newyorkbrad" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I have no role or participation on Commons, but from my work on English WP
> I'm aware of the very real copyright status of "free as a practical matter
> although someone could theoretically make a disputed technical argument
> otherwise."
>
> One solution, where there is a good-faith argument the image is free and no
> rights-holder claiming otherwise, would be a disclaimer. Perhaps something
> along the lines of "It is believed this image is in the public domain [or,
> the status of this image depends on resolution of an open legal issue, or
> whatever] and therefore eligible for inclusion on Wikimedia Commons and for
> re-use. However, it is possible that the free status of this image could be
> disputed because [brief explanation of reason]. Potential re-users should
> therefore proceed cautiously."
>
> I hasten to add that this would be appropriate only where the impediment to
> freedom is seen as mostly theoretical, not to screw over legitimate claims
> by rightsholders or by people with privacy interests implicated by the
> image.
>
> Newyorkbrad
>
>
> On Monday, December 30, 2013, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On 30 December 2013 11:26, Gerard Meijssen <[hidden email]
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Hoi Tomasz,
> >>
> >> You have a really strong opinion. When you read this thread, you will
> >> notice that it is not appreciated by many and seen as disruptive. Can
> you
> >> appreciate it in this way?
> >>
> >> You argument about re-users is valid when you turn around the argument
> as
> >> well; as long as we do NOT have a take down notice re-users are better
> >> served by the continuation of the presence of images.
> >> Thanks,
> >>      GerardM
> >>
> >>
> > No because then reusers also get hit which a bunch of takedown notices
> (or
> > lawsuits) which is decidedly disruptive for them.
> >
> >
> > --
> > geni
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright URAA trolls on Wikimedia Commons

Nathan Awrich
On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Fæ <[hidden email]> wrote:

> The URAA is rather more than theoretical. There is more milage  in
> developing a defensive approach for orphan works. Again I think an
> inclusive discussion on Commons is more useful if anyone intends to
> progress this.
>
> Fae


I'm finding it interesting to read this discussion, even though I don't
normally scan through discussions on Commons itself. Decentralized
discussion is practically hallowed tradition at this point, so I don't see
the harm in it. I'm sure anyone reading this thread is fully aware that you
believe it should be elsewhere, it is probably unnecessary to remind us
again.

~Nathan
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright URAA trolls on Wikimedia Commons

Tomasz Ganicz
In reply to this post by Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia)
2013/12/30 Newyorkbrad <[hidden email]>:

> I have no role or participation on Commons, but from my work on English WP
> I'm aware of the very real copyright status of "free as a practical matter
> although someone could theoretically make a disputed technical argument
> otherwise."
>
> One solution, where there is a good-faith argument the image is free and no
> rights-holder claiming otherwise, would be a disclaimer. Perhaps something
> along the lines of "It is believed this image is in the public domain [or,
> the status of this image depends on resolution of an open legal issue, or
> whatever] and therefore eligible for inclusion on Wikimedia Commons and for
> re-use. However, it is possible that the free status of this image could be
> disputed because [brief explanation of reason]. Potential re-users should
> therefore proceed cautiously."
>

There are actually many templates saying something similar on Commons
- regarding trademark issues, privacy issues, etc. Even template
US-Gov-PD has such a similar statement - just because it is not always
clear if the US-Gov-PD works are always PD in other jursdictions. The
typical example are pictures of Obama and his family - taken by his
personal photographer who is employed by White House (thus he is
US-Gov employee) - but the pictures are issued on Flickr and several
other places under various licences with personality rights
disclaimers...


--
Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
http://www.cbmm.lodz.pl/work.php?id=29&title=tomasz-ganicz

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright URAA trolls on Wikimedia Commons

Michael Maggs
In reply to this post by Fae-3
Yes, I am working on this now, and will put up a proposal to amend policy on Commons in the next day or two.  It is of particular relevance to UK Crown Copyright works.

Michael


On 30 Dec 2013, at 14:56, Fæ <[hidden email]> wrote:

> The URAA is rather more than theoretical. There is more milage  in
> developing a defensive approach for orphan works. Again I think an
> inclusive discussion on Commons is more useful if anyone intends to
> progress this.
>
> Fae
> On 30 Dec 2013 14:04, "Newyorkbrad" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> I have no role or participation on Commons, but from my work on English WP
>> I'm aware of the very real copyright status of "free as a practical matter
>> although someone could theoretically make a disputed technical argument
>> otherwise."
>>
>> One solution, where there is a good-faith argument the image is free and no
>> rights-holder claiming otherwise, would be a disclaimer. Perhaps something
>> along the lines of "It is believed this image is in the public domain [or,
>> the status of this image depends on resolution of an open legal issue, or
>> whatever] and therefore eligible for inclusion on Wikimedia Commons and for
>> re-use. However, it is possible that the free status of this image could be
>> disputed because [brief explanation of reason]. Potential re-users should
>> therefore proceed cautiously."
>>
>> I hasten to add that this would be appropriate only where the impediment to
>> freedom is seen as mostly theoretical, not to screw over legitimate claims
>> by rightsholders or by people with privacy interests implicated by the
>> image.
>>
>> Newyorkbrad


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
???
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright URAA trolls on Wikimedia Commons

???
In reply to this post by Yann Forget-3
On 30/12/2013 09:59, Yann Forget wrote:

> Hi,
>
> 2013/12/30 Samuel Klein <[hidden email]>
>
>> On Dec 29, 2013 5:51 PM, "Fæ" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 29 Dec 2013 22:43, "Klaus Graf" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I think it would be the best if _all_ URAA affected files would be kept
>>>> until a DMCA take down notice.
>>>
>>> Your proposal would be more useful made with the Commons community
>>
>> Both excellent suggestions.
>>
>> Sam.
>
>
> Are you suggesting that we can keep URAA affected data until we get a
> takedown notice?
> That's new AFAIK, and many people will be happy if this is accepted by the
> WMF.
>


Isn't that the attitude that got Kim Dotcom into trouble?
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/12/us-unveils-the-case-against-kim-dotcom-revealing-e-mails-and-financial-data/



_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright URAA trolls on Wikimedia Commons

Yann Forget-3
2013/12/31 ??? <[hidden email]>
>
>
> Isn't that the attitude that got Kim Dotcom into trouble?
> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/12/us-unveils-the-
> case-against-kim-dotcom-revealing-e-mails-and-financial-data/


This is a typical trolling. Comparing Megaupload with Wikimedia Commons?
Don't you have better (constructive) arguments?

Yann
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Wikimedia-l] Saving some URAA-affected files on Commons (was Copyright URAA trolls on Wikimedia Commons)

Michael Maggs
In reply to this post by Klaus Graf
Please see here

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Hosting_of_content_released_to_the_global_public_domain

for a new Commons policy proposal.

Obvious first candidates are the government-generated works of the UK, Canada and Israel, but there will certainly be other countries that could take advantage of the policy, if approved, to save many files from imminent deletion.

Michael


On 29 Dec 2013, at 22:43, Klaus Graf <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Can nobody stop the URAA Copyright trolls mass deleting perfect fine files
> on Commons?
>
> I think it would be the best if _all_ URAA affected files would be kept
> until a DMCA take down notice.
>
> But in the case of in the country of origin PD works which are foreign
> government works it is needed that the WMF clearly speaks out that such
> works could be accepted on Commons even when a written statement of the
> foreign government doesn't exist.
>
> See for Canada's crown copyright
>
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Burlington_Skyway_1958.png
>
> Klaus Graf
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
12