Tag: wikipedia

Monkey selfie is public domain

Picture thanks to Wiki Commons

Picture thanks to Wiki Commons

It looks like Wikipedia was right, and the “ape selfie” photo really is public domain.

The US Copyright Office has ruled  against David Slater the photographer, who has claimed ownership snap saying that images taken by animals, including the 2011 primate self-shot, could not be registered for copyright by a human.

“The Office will not register works produced by nature, animals, or plants,” the US copyright authority said.

While we can see that a camera could be struck by lightning and take a pic, we are not sure how a tree could take a picture, but it is clear that the USOP is covering all its bases here.  We notice that if a lump of a satellite falls on your camera and takes a picture that would technically be covered, because it is not nature.

However the copyright office will not register anything which is claimed to have been created by divine or supernatural beings, although the Office may register a work where the states that the work was inspired by a divine spirit.

So if I claim that my novel Sex Slaves of Babylon was inspired by the God Marduk it could be copyrighted, but if I claimed Marduk actually wrote it, then it could not be.

The copyright office specifically cites the monkey snap which has been the source of a legal battle between the Wikimedia Foundation and Slate when a macaque nicked his camera and pressed the shutter button a number of times.

 

Wikipedia shocked by hatred

walesThe Wikimedia movement’s 10th Wikimania conference at the London Barbican  turned out a little more badly than expected.

Normally the event is a love fest between the editors and staff of Wikipedia all centred on the founder Jimmy Wales.

But according to wikipediocracy  the event was spoiled as the British Press failed to share the love and kicked the event to death.

Wales made the mistake of being interviewed in a Newsnight interview with James O’Brien, in which Wales insisted that the right to be forgotten only covered links and should adjudicated by a court of law.

Wales is a member of Google’s advisory board and his theory is that European taxpayers should pay, without limitation, for their already-overburdened court systems to deal with every single revenge-porn complaint Google receives under the ruling.

However Wales should have chosen his sparing person a little more carefully  O’Brien, has been repeatedly defamed in his Wikipedia biography has little love for the way Wackypedia operates.

“I could go on Wikipedia now and describe you as believing in fairies and a man whose – I don’t know – favourite drink is the blood of freshly slaughtered kittens. That’s neither history nor truth, but it could be on Wikipedia,” O’Brien snarled at Wales.

When Wales started laughing O’Brien growled:  “It’s not funny, if you’re sort of an ordinary person and you have a degree of public profile, and people have deliberately altered your Wikipedia page. I have spoken publicly about my children having been born as a result of fertility treatment. And my Wikipedia page, which I didn’t even know existed, contained a phrase along the lines of ‘he wasn’t man enough to impregnate his own wife’. That was there for weeks, months possibly, until my wife found it. Shouldn’t that be your priority?”

All Wales could come up with was that it was up to the victims to police his site.

What Wales did not get was that that three years of their own spying scandals, the UK press is big on privacy so when Wales proudly tried to put a positive spin on their refusal to grant any of the 304 “content removal requests” wackypedia had received in the past two years, it came out badly.

The Guardian published a profile of Wales that referred to his past as an “internet pornographer” and said that Wikipedia is populated by “self-selecting cliques” that pay more attention to the site’s coverage of female porn stars than to its listing of women writers.

Ironically Wikimania ended with a presentation by Jimmy Wales on “civility”. This seemed to involve talking about users who have a reputation in the community for creating good content, and for being incredibly toxic personalities.

Wales said, stating that “these editors cost us more than they’re actually worth”. It was a “big mistake” to tolerate them, he continued, receiving rapturous applause.

At least he has learned something.

Wackypedia in trouble over selfie

Picture thanks to Wiki Commons

Picture thanks to Wiki Commons

Online encyclopaedia Wikipedia is in hot water over a selfie picture which a monkey took of itself when it stole an English nature photographer’s camera.

Wackypedia claims that since the monkey took the picture it is public domain and the picture does not belong to photojournalist David Slater, who owned the camera. It had put the pictures in its Wikimedia Commons and Slater claims that is costing him money.

The black macaca nigra monkey swiped the camera from Slater during a 2011 shoot in Indonesia and snapped tons of pictures, incWluding the selfie and others at issue.

Wikimedia said that it had received a takedown request from Slater, claiming that he owned the copyright to the photographs, but it did not agree.

The image has at times been removed from the Wikimedia Commons by various site editors and keeps coming back.

Slater said the picture should not be in the public domain. While a monkey pressed the button, but I did all the setting up.

Wikimedia said that to claim copyright, the photographer would have had to make substantial contributions to the final image, and even then, they would only have copyright for those alterations, not the underlying image. This means that there was no one on whom to bestow copyright, so the image falls into the public domain.

Russians hack Wikipedia entry on flight MH17

imperial_russiaAs it looks like the missile that downed flight MH17 was fired by pro-Russian separatists armed by Tsar Vladimir Putin, another war is breaking out on the online encyclopaedia Wikipedia.

Tsar Putin’s government has been caught out removing sections of Wikipedia which accuse it of providing the missiles that were used to down the civilian airliner.

The Twitter bot which monitors edits made to the online encyclopaedia from Russian government IP addresses has spotted that changes are being made to a page relating to the crash.

A user from within the All-Russia State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company (VGTRK) changed a Russian language version of a page listing civil aviation accidents to say: “The plane [flight MH17] was shot down by Ukrainian soldiers,” which is what Tsar Putin wants you to think.

This replaced text, written an hour earlier, which said MH17 had been shot down “by terrorists of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic with Buk system missiles, which the terrorists received from the Russian Federation.”

The government was caught by an automated Twitter bot called congress-edits was created to monitor for changes made from US Congress computers and immediately tweet them.

That source code powering that project was made public, allowing the creation of RUGovEdits which performs a similar role in Russia.

Tsar Putin has denied any responsibility over the shooting down of the jet, which should have been an end to the matter. He said that the “government over whose territory it occurred is responsible for this terrible tragedy.”

If you read that literally he is saying that the Ukrainian government was responsible for him having to arm the separatists, and also had to face blame for the trigger happy nutjobs mistaking a passenger plane for a Ukrainian government cargo plane.

Normally it is the US government which tinkers with Wikipedia entries with staff of Congress members often having a crack at improving their boss’s image.

Microsoft once offered an engineer money to update articles on two competing standards.