Copyvios flow in, copyvios flow out


© Mila Zinkova, CC-BY-SA-2.5

Much of the work at Wikimedia Commons revolves around identifying and removing copyright violations. So it is unusual to find that someone copyio’ed our content rather than the other way round.

Mbz1’s story is here:

Few days ago I got e-mail from London. The guy e-mailed me that he saw my image of a puffer fish at the posters advertising Kleenex in London tube. I asked him, if he could take an image of this poster and he was kind enough to do it for me. He e-mailed the image of the poster to me. There was my fish at this poster all right. I felt “all puffed up” and I e-mailed to Kleenex for the explanations. Today they called me. They admitted they took my image from Wikipedia and they told me that the artist, who did it, was told that Wikipedia is the place to get free images. [..] They apologized, they are going to pay me 700 Pound sterlings, send me the copy of the poster and a letter with the admission they violated my copy rights. My main condition was that I did not want them to punish the artist, who I sure, has not had a bad intention and took my image by mistake.

LOL. I’m pretty sure taking the time to read the license would have been cheaper than £700.

26 January, 2008 • ,

Comment

Commenting is closed for this article.

list of all posts, ever

find articles by tag

monthly archive

most popular articles

  1. An alternative term for "User-generated content"
  2. Translation in Wikimedia Projects
  3. More reports from Wikimania
  4. Interview with Sue Gardner
  5. WikiProjects starting to use pageview stats in article assessment
  6. Get Your FreeCon
  7. Google Reader users: a favour...
  8. Links for 2008-04-06
  9. Who had the best time at Wikimania? Maybe my roommate
  10. The need for community APIs

(from the last 30 days)