I've sent an email. Anyone else?Genisock2 20:16, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988
This is a key document, available from the OPSI at .
Of interest is the entirety of chapter 3 (starting at  and continuing on the next page). This sets out a long list of "Acts Permitted in Relation to Copyright Works" - starting with fair dealing, then a long list of more specific exemptions. This contrasts with the U.S. situation, where there is a more generous fair use test.
See in particular section 62  "Representation of certain artistic works on public display". This basically sets out the kind of exemptions for which we are arguing, except that they apply only to buildings and "sculptures, models for buildings and works of artistic craftsmanship, if permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public." Warofdreams 01:34, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- Well that's a different point. We're talking about the copyright of photographs of works already in the public domain. That's taking away certain rights from works still in copyright. But perhaps we want a brief comment on fair use in that end section. --Cfp 11:46, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Number of UK editors
I have estimated that there are at least 1,500 active wikimedians in the UK, based on:
- There are 1545 pages in en:Category:Wikipedians_in_the_United_Kingdom; of these 46 appear to relate to non-users or duplicates (e.g. having both a user page and a subpage)
- There are also 995 user pages in en:Category:British_Wikipedians
Of course there will be considerable cross over.
You will have some people who are part of that category but not British based. However, this will almost certainly be outweighed by the number of people in Britain who:
- Haven't put the category on their page
- Edit in another language that English
- Are active on a project other than Wikipedia
I think this is quite an impressive statistic so I'd like to add it in - please let me know if you come across any better stats. AndrewRT 21:38, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
deadline has been extended to 27 February 2009.Geni 14:24, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
OS maps and copyright
Question about OS maps.
I have noticed a trend towards several councils publishing old (over 80 years old) maps from OS sources.
These are often displayed by software and cannot be downloaded. THe viewers tend to have a small wiondow through which you can see a small portion of the map. They also tend to say "copyright LOCAL COUNCIL"
If one was to take a screenshot of those portions and stitch them together would one be breaking copyright ?
1 the image (c1780 AD)is a copyfree version of old OS map 2 the image is now a stitched together area of the OS map
It seems ridiculous to me that we cannot access the original and are reduced to such means to get the images of documents that we should be able to see. It may be that they are the only examples of these available.
Chaosdruid 20:23, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
- This is the same issue as highlighted by the NPG, and revolves around the question of whether digitized copies of public domain works can be copyrighted (US: no, UK: unclear but probably no). The best option IMO is to send the council an email and ask them if they would be willing to release a copy of the map under the public domain for use on Wikimedia projects. That way, all ambiguity is avoided. I'm happy to contact them asking that (invoking the WMUK name, assuming the rest of the board is happy for me to do that), if that helps. Mike Peel 20:33, 29 August 2009 (UTC)