Wikiquote and the Dutch copyright law V

Arbitration Committee activities and elections, Requests for Comment, and Requests for Administration.
Post Reply
User avatar
EarlStatler
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2017 1:19 pm

Wikiquote and the Dutch copyright law V

Post by EarlStatler » Tue Sep 19, 2017 6:10 pm

Were are we talking about? Wikiquote-NL. A project with sometimes three, sometimes two, and now almost zero users. The epicenter of the conflict Graaf Statler versus the users of Wikipedia-NL.
You are curious? Luister en huiver, and you will be again astonished. Astonished by the Romaine Wikimedia trolling. Astonished by the De Wikischim trolling. Astonished by the Vinvlught trolling. Astonished by the Robotje Wikimedia trolling. Yes you will, I am sure.

Let's start with the Terms of Use of the Foundation and Jimmy's mission stament. And let me make one thing clear to you, a American Foundation can't overrule the law's of my country! In no way!
Well, let's have I look in the history of that page Terms of Use. , The first name I see, is from our friend James Alexander, the man who was planning to go to law school in a year or two according to his user page, but never went. And he was obviously not the only editor of this page who never went to law school, because it's rubbish. But it has some interesting aspects.

The Terms of Use
1a. We do not take an editorial role. Fine, because the manly Dutch users take that editorial role, the server is in Haarlem, the language is Dutch, and the rules are made by Dutch users is the content of the Dutch wiki products under the Dutch law.
2a.You are responsible for your own actions. Correct. For clarity, applicable law includes at least the laws of the United States of America. Again correct. So, you are under under two legal systems, the Dutch and the American, and there sleeps the legal devil. Because you have the worst of the two systems. And here it comes: WMF generally cannot offer any protection, guarantee, immunity or indemnification. In Holland Terms of Use must be reasonable, because we are under Dutch law. Otherwise the Judge declares them not valid. Are these terms responsabel? Do what ever you want, it's not our business? That is up to the judge, but what do you think yourself, if you subsidizes Wikimedia-NL, what is heavy is involved in the Dutch wiki projects?
Enough Terms of Use, legal experts have made clear to both me and the sysop of Wikiquote Whaledad this is right, Wikiquote is under two legal systems.

The mission of Jimmy
The slogan of the Dutch Wiki mouvement. "Stel je een wereld voor waarin elke persoon vrije toegang heeft tot alle kennis. Dat is waar wij aan werken". I mis something. “Imagine a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to all human knowledge. That's what we're doing.” What am I missing? The sum, the sum of all human knowledge. And for this reason the Dutch wiki projects are digital trashcan, inclusionists collect ev-er-thing. Copyvoi,crap, it doesn't matter, as long as it is knowledge whatever that may be. So also on Wikiquote-NL when Whaledad and I found a shocking digital dump in 2012, called the Dutch Wikiquote, were I came accidentally.

Wikiquote NL
There were three participants, De Wikischim, Romaine and Mdd. And let's start with Mdd.
Wikiquote was abandoned. Only Mdd was active, and sometimes de Wikischim, and Mdd had developed a new format, a kind of Wikipedia articles build up out of quotes. Like you built up a car out of parts. Stolen parts, because he was claiming is was allowed. It was allowed to use quotes in this way according to him. But it is not, we have a strict copyright law.

What had Mdd done? Mdd had written many, many artikels what were in fact encyclopedic articles, built up out of quotes out of paper sources. And when I protested against this use of Het citaatrecht, because in my opinion this was incorrect, Mdd, Romaine en De Wikischim were protesting, and later Romaine and De Wikischim started to troll. Mdd left in a early stadium, and became sysop on WQ-EN.

Look at this page. (Robot.) I will highlight a few topics. The user Long Ago is me.
It's a lot of protest of Mdd, but this is interesting: Workgroup, Study group "Copyright on Wikiquote. Because, what is the propsal of Mdd?
A request the conciliators to set up a workgroup "Copyright on Wikiquote", possibly co-operation with Wikipedia and Wikimedia Netherlands! And also the statement of me that it is impossible to give a article build up in this way free under the CC licence, because that is only possible when it is your one work.

And after this stated the terrible trolling of Romaine with his Wikimedia vision, he was terrible. Every time the same, he was not active there, but always trolling, whining, obstruction, it never ended. And the Wikischim. it was one big fight, and at the end he is blocked. it was a drama, he didn't want to respect the copyright law. In no way. And we had Robotje trolling, Vinvught trolling, it was hopeless. They wanted to keep to any price the copyright violations, and the crap. And Whaledad and I found out that het citaatrecht much more limited was than it seems, because of the jurisprudence. The combination of the jurisprudence and the Code Napoléon had made this law one of the most tricky law you can imagine.

Here is a good example,
, Jan Boerstoel. The postman is me.

*Jan Boerstoel - Hoewel ijzersterk is dit toch wel een schoolvoorbeeld van waarvoor het citaatrecht niet bedoelt is! En wat is het subtile verschil dat het in het Parool geen auteursrechtenschending is en hier wel? Dat zit in het doel. Het citaatrecht stelt immers dat er een duidelijk doel moet zijn om een citaat te gebruiken, en dat doel is bij ons (markante) citaten verzamelen. Vandaar dat wij met aanvullende eisen te maken hebben om dit te rechtvaardigen, zoals b.v een aanhaling die verplicht is, context, enz. Maar, het Parool gebruikt het citaat om hun artikel te verduidelijken, en heeft hiermee een doel, en daarom is het daar geen auteursrechtenschending. En dat doel hebben wij stomweg niet. Daarnaast is het Parool hooguit een aanhaling, en geen bron, maar dit terzijde. Laatste punt opgelost door Whaledad, waarvoor dank, de overige bezwaren blijven echter bestaan. Door mij dus niet genoeg markant bevonden om hier op te nemen/te handhaven, want voor ons is en blijft het een stukje ergens weggeplukte tekst. De enige juiste conclusie zou dan ook zijn dat hetzelfde citaat afhankelijk van het doel al dan niet een auteursrechten schending kan zijn. (Gaarne corrigeren indien deze analyse niet klopt, heer Whaledad.) The Postman Always Rings Twice (overleg) 24 mrt 2017 10:59 (CET)

*Perfecte analyse. Zonder context, verklaring, doel, kan dit (met slechts één gevonden aanhaling) inderdaad niet zo blijven staan. Ik houdt het nog even aan, om anderen de gelegenheid te geven om meer aanhalingen en/of context te bieden. W\|/haledad (zegt u het maar) 17 sep 2017 03:24 (CEST)

What is going on. The quote was published in a Dutch newspaper, het Parool to clarify an article. This is no copyright infringement copyright infringement. Why? Because the purpose is to clarify the article. But, on Wikiqoute is the same quote a copyright infringement! Why? I tell you later.
Last edited by EarlStatler on Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:35 pm, edited 20 times in total.
If you're in a dogfight, become a cat!

User avatar
EarlStatler
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2017 1:19 pm

Re: Wikiquote and the Dutch copyright law.

Post by EarlStatler » Tue Sep 19, 2017 6:25 pm

Aggie, will you change the title in "Wikiquote and the Dutch copyright law V" please? Thanks!
If you're in a dogfight, become a cat!

User avatar
Flip Flopped
Posts: 243
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 11:55 pm

Re: Wikiquote and the Dutch copyright law.

Post by Flip Flopped » Wed Sep 20, 2017 12:02 am

EarlStatler wrote:
Tue Sep 19, 2017 6:25 pm
Aggie, will you change the title in "Wikiquote and the Dutch copyright law V" please? Thanks!
Done. :)

User avatar
EarlStatler
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2017 1:19 pm

Re: Wikiquote and the Dutch copyright law V

Post by EarlStatler » Wed Sep 20, 2017 5:04 am

Thanks!
If you're in a dogfight, become a cat!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest