|
In July 2009, lawyers representing the National Portrait Gallery of London (NPG) sent an email letter warning of possible legal action for alleged copyright infringement to Derrick Coetzee, an editor / administrator of the free content multimedia repository Wikimedia Commons, hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation. ==NPG claims== The letter stated that Coetzee had downloaded more than 3,300 high-resolution images from the British National Portrait Gallery's database of images and in March 2009 had posted them on Wikimedia Commons.〔〔〔 〕 The NPG letter stated the claim that while the painted portraits may be old (and have thus fallen into the public domain), the high-quality photographic reproductions are recent works, and qualify as copyrighted works due to the amount of work it took to digitize and restore them,〔 〕〔〔 that the action of uploading the images infringed on both the NPG's database rights and copyrights,〔〔 〕〔〔 〕 and that the images were obtained through the circumvention of technical measures used to prevent downloading of the prints.〔 〕 The NPG also stated that the public availability of the images would affect revenue acquired from licensing the images to third parties, revenue also used to fund the project of digitizing their collection,〔 an effort that the NPG claims cost the organization over £1,000,000.〔 The NPG had requested a response by July 20, 2009 from Coetzee, and also requested that the images be removed from the site, but noted that the NPG was not considering any legal action against the Wikimedia Foundation.〔〔 The NPG announced that Coetzee had responded via his legal representative by the requested deadline.〔〔 〕 Coetzee's legal representation was provided by the Electronic Frontier Foundation.〔〔 〕 Coetzee publicly posted a copy of the legal letter from the NPG, indicating that he desired to "enable public discourse on the issue".〔 On July 17, 2009, NPG gallery spokesperson, Eleanor Macnair, stated that "contact has now been made" with the Wikimedia Foundation and "we remain hopeful that a dialogue will be possible."〔 The NPG has stated that it would be willing to permit Wikipedia to use low-resolution images, and that it hoped to avoid taking any further legal action.〔 The NPG had previously attempted to contact the Wikimedia Foundation in April 2009 regarding this issue, but did not receive an immediate response.〔 The British Association of Picture Libraries and Agencies (BAPLA), an image industry trade group, has expressed support for the gallery.〔 〕 In early 2010, an NPG spokesperson reported to heise Open, a division of German publishing house Heinz Heise, "We had a constructive discussion in December and are now considering how best to come to an agreement."〔 〕 In November 2010, Tom Morgan, Head of Rights and Reproductions at the National Portrait Gallery addressed a conference attended by both Wikipedians and representatives of cultural institutions. Mr. Morgan's presentation was entitled "Wikipedia and the National Portrait Gallery – A bad first date? A perspective on the developing relationship between Wikipedia and cultural heritage organisations".〔(Wikimedia UK blog post ), "GLAM-WIKI Schedule Announced", November 14, 2010. Accessed November 28, 2010〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア(Wikipedia)』 ■ウィキペディアで「National Portrait Gallery and Wikimedia Foundation copyright dispute」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|