13 July 2009 | Author: L. Sutherland Head of Media Content
Wikipedia is the undisputed champion of online encyclopaedias these days. However, that doesn't mean that the information-collating site is above the law, as the National Portrait Gallery has pointed out.
According to The Register, the NPG has hit back at Wikipedia, claiming that the site has violated 3,000 copyrights belonging to the arts institution. The images in question were uploaded by US user DCoetzee to the Wikimedia Commons site.
The Gallery claims it contacted the Wikimedia Foundation to complain way back in April. However, after failing to receive a response, the NPG decided to sue the user personally. DCoetzee decided to post the citation online and alerted The Register of the issue with an email statement. The problem is centered on the fact that while the original subjects aren't in copyright, photos of the images are - and the Gallery holds the rights to these photos. DCoetzee has not made a public statement regarding the question of whether the images should be in the public domain or not.
The Londonist reports that it is the resolution of the images that is one of the central issues. DCoetzee is rumoured to have circumnavigated the NPG's technical barriers to download high resolution images to then upload on the encyclopaedia.
In its defence, the Gallery's page explaining its copyright policy says it has "a public duty not only to conserve and display works in its Collection but also to ensure they are correctly represented in reproductions and publications"
The fact that displaying pictures on Wikipedia essentially grants permission to anyone reading the page to duplicate and save the image should they wish to. This then opens the door to the possibility that people will reuse the images elsewhere, without permission. Yet the potential court case could open a can of worms both for web publishing and the Gallery. As the paintings of the NPG technically belong to the nation, does that mean that they should also belong to anyone that has access to a computer?
Wikipedia in hot water with National Portrait Gallery
Wikipedia is the undisputed champion of online encyclopaedias these days. However, that doesn't mean that the information-collating site is above the law, as the National Portrait Gallery has pointed out. According to The Register, the NPG has hit back at Wikipedia, claiming that the site has violated 3,000 copyrights belonging to the arts institution. The images in question were uploaded by US user DCoetzee to the Wikimedia Commons site.
The Gallery claims it contacted the Wikimedia Foundation to complain way back in April. However, after failing to receive a response, the NPG decided to sue the user personally. DCoetzee decided to post the citation online and alerted The Register of the issue with an email statement. The problem is centered on the fact that while the original subjects aren't in copyright, photos of the images are - and the Gallery holds the rights to these photos. DCoetzee has not made a public statement regarding the question of whether the images should be in the public domain or not.
The Londonist reports that it is the resolution of the images that is one of the central issues. DCoetzee is rumoured to have circumnavigated the NPG's technical barriers to download high resolution images to then upload on the encyclopaedia.
In its defence, the Gallery's page explaining its copyright policy says it has "a public duty not only to conserve and display works in its Collection but also to ensure they are correctly represented in reproductions and publications"
The fact that displaying pictures on Wikipedia essentially grants permission to anyone reading the page to duplicate and save the image should they wish to. This then opens the door to the possibility that people will reuse the images elsewhere, without permission. Yet the potential court case could open a can of worms both for web publishing and the Gallery. As the paintings of the NPG technically belong to the nation, does that mean that they should also belong to anyone that has access to a computer?
English
German/Deutsch
Norwegian/Norsk
Swedish/Svenska
Italian/Italiano
French/Français
Spanish/Español
Latest News
Study finds Twitter hard to resist
Apple pulls iPad and iPhones in Germany
Pinterest catches up to social networks with referral traffic
Sony names gaming chief Kazuo Hirai CEO
Angry Birds boss doesn't see Piracy as a bad thing
Apple overtakes HP as biggest PC-maker
RSS News Feeds
Related Articles
