Talk:WMUK response to European Commission copyright consultation

This proposed response to the review by the European Commission of EU copyright rules is based on WMUK's own Vision, values and mission and our own experiences, and in some places draws upon responses suggested by others, particularly here, here and here. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:44, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Community comments

Thanks for the time and expertise you've put in to this Michael. I made some notes as I was reading, I'm essentially happy with everything (and don't have the same level of knowledge on the area) but in any case some thoughts:

1. On 5, whether it's worth mentioning I don't know, but I can think of non-rights issues in content access which might be relevant here (e.g. images that are illegal in some countries)
2. On 47 I wonder if we should cross-ref to 53 (re: restrictions in indexing/crawling of content and the impact on innovation this has had, including in the academic search engine domain)
3. On 50, I have no idea what the law is on creating translations and formats of copyrighted works, e.g. can we freely create Braille copies? I seem to remember some issue with Amazon restricting text-to-speech on Kindles, a restriction that disproportionately affects blind users. Wikimedia projects are quite good at 'tying together' versioning in any case.
4. On 77 I don't know if we have an opinion here, but the issue is engaged in on commons re: photos of private individuals
5. On 80.2 re: the insurance note, I would be inclined to say "could" rather than "should" as this is (I think) one solution that we're providing in anticipation of a likely complaint, but it is not necessarily the only one we would endorse (I think).

Thanks again, Sjgknight (talk) 12:42, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Simon, will incorporate those points. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 14:44, 5 February 2014 (UTC)