Archives May 2021

Sex, mental and physical exercise, fight dementia

Friday, April 8, 2005Professor Perry Bartlett of University of Queensland‘s Brain Institute recommends sex, cryptic crosswords and a good run to stave off dementia.

The researcher, interviewed on Australian ABC radio today [1], said that with 52,000 Australians expected to be diagnosed with dementia by the end of the year, people wishing to ward off the degenerative disorder may benefit from activities which stimulate growth of new cells in the brain, accompanied by mental exercise to select for survival of the resulting crop of new cells.

“Quite prolonged exercise is very good to make new neurones,” said the Professor. “These new nerve cells are really quite vital to our ability to function in the higher brain functions, such as memory and learning. Most of them die. We now know that we can preserve some of them by giving direct stimuli.”

Professor Bartlett explained recent research findings, including those from collaborator Jeffrey D. Macklis [2] at Harvard in the US.

“There are a lot of hormones and changes in blood that go up and down after exercise, and so that may be a lead to some of the chemicals that can drive the production of nerve cells.

“One of the chemicals that seems to promote neurogenesis is prolactin, and prolactin levels are very high in pregnant females. Prolactin levels, by the way, also go up during sex as well. So one could think of a number of more entertaining activities than running in order to regulate the production of nerve cells.

“Perhaps doing something a little more inquisitive or intellectual might be good at selecting their survival. So perhaps one should run a long distance and do the cryptic crossword or something like that,” he said.

Professor Bartlett gave the same suggestions as being potentially helpful in depression, last year in an interview on the ABC Science Show. [3]

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Sex,_mental_and_physical_exercise,_fight_dementia&oldid=1887108”

Two-millenia-old Chinese guard gets unwanted new recruit

Friday, September 22, 2006

Legendary Emperor Qin Shi Huang of China had one more terracotta warrior guarding his tomb, recently. Pablo Wendel, an art student from Germany, disguised himself as one of the clay sculptures surrounding Qinshihuang in his final resting place, now a museum.

Police protecting the northern China museum searched for an extended period of time, as Wendel stood silently, among several thousand sculptures. When police found the 26-year-old performance artist, who later told them he was fascinated by the monumental display, they carried him away “as if he were a log.”

China was united by Emperor Qin Shi Huang over 2,200 years ago. The tomb in Xian, once the capital of China, is open to the public as a museum.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Two-millenia-old_Chinese_guard_gets_unwanted_new_recruit&oldid=733465”

Digital Technologies Driving Healthcare Industry In 2020

The healthcare industry is expected to reach $280 billion in upcoming years.

2020 will be an essential year for the health industry. When it is about digital health trends, law, artificial intelligence, telemedicine is used to solve the biggest challenges of our age.

Here is a list of the major trends you should know about digital health technologies in 2020:

Most essential digital health trend is MDR:

MDR i.e., Medical Device Regulation, will transform the entire admin scene in the EU. This is going to create an immense impact on mobile app development companies.

The MDR came in order in 2017 and implemented from May 26, 2020.

From that date, every new gadget should have promoted, sold, or appropriated in the European market and need to be confirmed. Strategize successfully and keep your health tech data secure, which guarantees you have great partners.

Health systems with telemedicine:

2020 is going to be the year of telemedicine as it is now mainstream in the healthcare industry. Personal health investment is booming at all lengths, prolonging the healthcare development circuit.

Almost every app and gadget is enabling healthcare application development companies to monitor, diagnose, and treat patients remotely.

It has real-time monitoring of ECG, GP consultation, and robots for doing surgery remotely.

Telemedicine is finding applications with monitors that remotely store a patient’s observation.

AI-enhanced technologies mimicking human-based behavior can drive innovation. Healthcare development companies must understand to make maximum use of AI technology to improve healthcare processes that achieve value with improved performance.

Telemedicine provides personalized and urgent care to patients and frees healthcare providers to deal with the higher number of critical cases.

Big Data and Analytics for Patient Care:

In the US, health care spending is highly expensive. Overall spending is $ 3.8 trillion per year.

Patient and patient care have revolutionized the way you think about health care. The analysis of this data provides a way to gain essential insights into medical conditions. At the individual level, data can form the basis for machine learning (AI), which models predict heart attacks.

On a broader scale, it provides an opportunity to transform epidemiology and save lives with mobile health globally.

Medical Artificial Intelligence:

Medical artificial intelligence has grown with big data analytics for diagnosis and care of the patient.

It will range from chatbots to initiate patients for help with emergency conditions for real-time diagnosis of heart attacks with the help of machine learning.

AI-based applications seek to improve and personalize healthcare delivery for individuals.

However, there are various challenges based on legal as well as technical for using the AI in health technology. Medical Data is usually taken in a distinct format and needs to be analyzed under observation in every few hours. This will transform the approach of traditional healthcare through machine learning. They could limit the application of AI in some scenarios where consent is the core of data processing under law.

The concept of creating a mobile app that is based on an anomaly detection system, a machine learning solution that exposes the intrusion of malignant tumors into health monitoring devices (such as MRI scans). Which is capable of intrusion detection? There is no anonymity in health care processes.

Population and its age:

The most prominent hurdle for global healthcare is demographics. Advancement in healthcare leads people to live more. But, the aging population can create a significant burden on healthcare app development firms.

Digital health applications and other digital devices can help leverage digital healthcare technology trends, often in different ways.

However, with increasing age by 2050, one in six people in the world will be over 65 (16%), one in 11 (9%) in 2019. It will open healthcare software development companies to address through Big Data and AI health issues via Healthcare software applications to improve care outcomes for patients in a hospital setting.

mHealth Apps and Wearable devices:

Virtual testing powered by wearable devices and the M-Healthcare smartphone app is expected to reach $ 450 million.

The virtual clinical trial concept is likely to emerge as it allows you to participate in trials of the clinic from your home or any other location.

The emergence of virtual tests helps reduce costs, as well as streamline processes and demonstrate real-world efficacy.

Augmented Reality role in Surgeries:

AR-based headsets and solutions take advantage of 2D images and other patient data and build 3D models of patient anatomy.

AR is a technique that is capable of revolutionizing the efficiency and cost optimization aspects of surgery while improving the error rate due to high accuracy and target detection within the patient’s body in the context of surgical navigation.

Also, the benefits of surgeon comfort, low effort, low wastage, or possibly low cost are parallel to AR’s performance systems.

EHR Blockchain Interoperability:

Blockchain has been a leader in healthcare, helping EHRs (electronic health records) with interoperability.

A significant challenge for doctors, resulting in regulatory non-specialization, poor referral management to specialists, now stays in the patient upon hospitalization and is unreadable in the hospital – all because the care team needs your complete medical history (eg, allergies Item). Access to specific drugs is not required.

Summing up:

Now that we have discussed about the trend of the most recent digital health technologies that will transform the landscape of the healthcare industry in 2020.

The future of healthcare application development companies to create healthcare applications empowered with AI and blockchain.

Look at these health trends shaping the healthcare industry, highlighting the endless possibilities the healthcare industry has to offer with health-based apps.

Contact us now.

Source Link –

Ireland requests replay of FIFA World Cup play-off with France

Friday, November 20, 2009

The Football Association of Ireland (FAI), Irish Minister for Sport, Taoiseach and Facebook social network groups are requesting a replay of the controversial FIFA World Cup play-off between Ireland and France in the interests of Fair Play. The FAI lodged an appeal with FIFA and also contacted the French Football Federation (FFF), it appears FAI hopes FFF may agree that a replay is fair play. Both captians, Thierry Henry and Robbie Keane, have called for a replay.

The Irish supporters, who in the past have won the FIFA Fair Play Award, are angry after a blatant double handball by Thierry Henry enabled France to score the extra-time goal that cost Ireland entry to next year’s FIFA World Cup finals in South Africa. Most Irish anger has been directed at FIFA, although French captain Thierry Henry has admitted handling the ball.

FAI has argued that there is a strong precedent; in 2005 where FIFA invalidated the result of a FIFA World Cup qualification match between Uzbekistan and Bahrain on the basis of a technical error by the match referee. However, Law 5 of the Laws of the Game state that: “The decisions of the referee regarding facts connected with play, including whether or not a goal is scored and the result of the match, are final.” and a source at Fifa headquarters in Switzerland said that “there is no way the game can be replayed”. The generic concept of fair play is a fundamental part of the game of football and the Fair Play Campaign was conceived largely as an indirect result of the 1986 FIFA World Cup in Mexico, when the handball goal by Diego Maradona.

The referee Martin Hansson and (referee’s assistants) Stefan Wittberg and Fredrik Nilsson were unable to see the incident but didn’t ask Thierry Henry if he handled the ball. Its hoped the mistake won’t cost the Swedish referee’s a place in South Africa. FIFA’s Fair play policy is playing by the rules, using common sense and respecting fellow players, referees, opponents and fans. The French union representing the nation’s gym teachers declared outrage at what it called “indisputable cheating.”

Minister for Sport Martin Cullen wrote to FIFA president Sepp Blatter urging him to call a rematch in the interests of fair play. Taoiseach Brian Cowen raised the issue with French president Nicolas Sarkozy on the fringes of last night’s EU summit. French Prime minister François Fillon said “neither the French government nor the Irish Government should interfere in the functioning of the international federation”.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Ireland_requests_replay_of_FIFA_World_Cup_play-off_with_France&oldid=4511251”

U.K. National Portrait Gallery threatens U.S. citizen with legal action over Wikimedia images

Tuesday, July 14, 2009

This article mentions the Wikimedia Foundation, one of its projects, or people related to it. Wikinews is a project of the Wikimedia Foundation.

The English National Portrait Gallery (NPG) in London has threatened on Friday to sue a U.S. citizen, Derrick Coetzee. The legal letter followed claims that he had breached the Gallery’s copyright in several thousand photographs of works of art uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons, a free online media repository.

In a letter from their solicitors sent to Coetzee via electronic mail, the NPG asserted that it holds copyright in the photographs under U.K. law, and demanded that Coetzee provide various undertakings and remove all of the images from the site (referred to in the letter as “the Wikipedia website”).

Wikimedia Commons is a repository of free-to-use media, run by a community of volunteers from around the world, and is a sister project to Wikinews and the encyclopedia Wikipedia. Coetzee, who contributes to the Commons using the account “Dcoetzee”, had uploaded images that are free for public use under United States law, where he and the website are based. However copyright is claimed to exist in the country where the gallery is situated.

The complaint by the NPG is that under UK law, its copyright in the photographs of its portraits is being violated. While the gallery has complained to the Wikimedia Foundation for a number of years, this is the first direct threat of legal action made against an actual uploader of images. In addition to the allegation that Coetzee had violated the NPG’s copyright, they also allege that Coetzee had, by uploading thousands of images in bulk, infringed the NPG’s database right, breached a contract with the NPG; and circumvented a copyright protection mechanism on the NPG’s web site.

The copyright protection mechanism referred to is Zoomify, a product of Zoomify, Inc. of Santa Cruz, California. NPG’s solicitors stated in their letter that “Our client used the Zoomify technology to protect our client’s copyright in the high resolution images.”. Zoomify Inc. states in the Zoomify support documentation that its product is intended to make copying of images “more difficult” by breaking the image into smaller pieces and disabling the option within many web browsers to click and save images, but that they “provide Zoomify as a viewing solution and not an image security system”.

In particular, Zoomify’s website comments that while “many customers — famous museums for example” use Zoomify, in their experience a “general consensus” seems to exist that most museums are concerned with making the images in their galleries accessible to the public, rather than preventing the public from accessing them or making copies; they observe that a desire to prevent high resolution images being distributed would also imply prohibiting the sale of any posters or production of high quality printed material that could be scanned and placed online.

Other actions in the past have come directly from the NPG, rather than via solicitors. For example, several edits have been made directly to the English-language Wikipedia from the IP address 217.207.85.50, one of sixteen such IP addresses assigned to computers at the NPG by its ISP, Easynet.

In the period from August 2005 to July 2006 an individual within the NPG using that IP address acted to remove the use of several Wikimedia Commons pictures from articles in Wikipedia, including removing an image of the Chandos portrait, which the NPG has had in its possession since 1856, from Wikipedia’s biographical article on William Shakespeare.

Other actions included adding notices to the pages for images, and to the text of several articles using those images, such as the following edit to Wikipedia’s article on Catherine of Braganza and to its page for the Wikipedia Commons image of Branwell Brontë‘s portrait of his sisters:

“THIS IMAGE IS BEING USED WITHOUT PERMISSION FROM THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER.”
“This image is copyright material and must not be reproduced in any way without permission of the copyright holder. Under current UK copyright law, there is copyright in skilfully executed photographs of ex-copyright works, such as this painting of Catherine de Braganza.
The original painting belongs to the National Portrait Gallery, London. For copies, and permission to reproduce the image, please contact the Gallery at picturelibrary@npg.org.uk or via our website at www.npg.org.uk”

Other, later, edits, made on the day that NPG’s solicitors contacted Coetzee and drawn to the NPG’s attention by Wikinews, are currently the subject of an internal investigation within the NPG.

Coetzee published the contents of the letter on Saturday July 11, the letter itself being dated the previous day. It had been sent electronically to an email address associated with his Wikimedia Commons user account. The NPG’s solicitors had mailed the letter from an account in the name “Amisquitta”. This account was blocked shortly after by a user with access to the user blocking tool, citing a long standing Wikipedia policy that the making of legal threats and creation of a hostile environment is generally inconsistent with editing access and is an inappropriate means of resolving user disputes.

The policy, initially created on Commons’ sister website in June 2004, is also intended to protect all parties involved in a legal dispute, by ensuring that their legal communications go through proper channels, and not through a wiki that is open to editing by other members of the public. It was originally formulated primarily to address legal action for libel. In October 2004 it was noted that there was “no consensus” whether legal threats related to copyright infringement would be covered but by the end of 2006 the policy had reached a consensus that such threats (as opposed to polite complaints) were not compatible with editing access while a legal matter was unresolved. Commons’ own website states that “[accounts] used primarily to create a hostile environment for another user may be blocked”.

In a further response, Gregory Maxwell, a volunteer administrator on Wikimedia Commons, made a formal request to the editorial community that Coetzee’s access to administrator tools on Commons should be revoked due to the prevailing circumstances. Maxwell noted that Coetzee “[did] not have the technically ability to permanently delete images”, but stated that Coetzee’s potential legal situation created a conflict of interest.

Sixteen minutes after Maxwell’s request, Coetzee’s “administrator” privileges were removed by a user in response to the request. Coetzee retains “administrator” privileges on the English-language Wikipedia, since none of the images exist on Wikipedia’s own website and therefore no conflict of interest exists on that site.

Legally, the central issue upon which the case depends is that copyright laws vary between countries. Under United States case law, where both the website and Coetzee are located, a photograph of a non-copyrighted two-dimensional picture (such as a very old portrait) is not capable of being copyrighted, and it may be freely distributed and used by anyone. Under UK law that point has not yet been decided, and the Gallery’s solicitors state that such photographs could potentially be subject to copyright in that country.

One major legal point upon which a case would hinge, should the NPG proceed to court, is a question of originality. The U.K.’s Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 defines in ¶ 1(a) that copyright is a right that subsists in “original literary, dramatic, musical or artistic works” (emphasis added). The legal concept of originality here involves the simple origination of a work from an author, and does not include the notions of novelty or innovation that is often associated with the non-legal meaning of the word.

Whether an exact photographic reproduction of a work is an original work will be a point at issue. The NPG asserts that an exact photographic reproduction of a copyrighted work in another medium constitutes an original work, and this would be the basis for its action against Coetzee. This view has some support in U.K. case law. The decision of Walter v Lane held that exact transcriptions of speeches by journalists, in shorthand on reporter’s notepads, were original works, and thus copyrightable in themselves. The opinion by Hugh Laddie, Justice Laddie, in his book The Modern Law of Copyright, points out that photographs lie on a continuum, and that photographs can be simple copies, derivative works, or original works:

“[…] it is submitted that a person who makes a photograph merely by placing a drawing or painting on the glass of a photocopying machine and pressing the button gets no copyright at all; but he might get a copyright if he employed skill and labour in assembling the thing to be photocopied, as where he made a montage.”

Various aspects of this continuum have already been explored in the courts. Justice Neuberger, in the decision at Antiquesportfolio.com v Rodney Fitch & Co. held that a photograph of a three-dimensional object would be copyrightable if some exercise of judgement of the photographer in matters of angle, lighting, film speed, and focus were involved. That exercise would create an original work. Justice Oliver similarly held, in Interlego v Tyco Industries, that “[i]t takes great skill, judgement and labour to produce a good copy by painting or to produce an enlarged photograph from a positive print, but no-one would reasonably contend that the copy, painting, or enlargement was an ‘original’ artistic work in which the copier is entitled to claim copyright. Skill, labour or judgement merely in the process of copying cannot confer originality.”.

In 2000 the Museums Copyright Group, a copyright lobbying group, commissioned a report and legal opinion on the implications of the Bridgeman case for the UK, which stated:

“Revenue raised from reproduction fees and licensing is vital to museums to support their primary educational and curatorial objectives. Museums also rely on copyright in photographs of works of art to protect their collections from inaccurate reproduction and captioning… as a matter of principle, a photograph of an artistic work can qualify for copyright protection in English law”. The report concluded by advocating that “museums must continue to lobby” to protect their interests, to prevent inferior quality images of their collections being distributed, and “not least to protect a vital source of income”.

Several people and organizations in the U.K. have been awaiting a test case that directly addresses the issue of copyrightability of exact photographic reproductions of works in other media. The commonly cited legal case Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. found that there is no originality where the aim and the result is a faithful and exact reproduction of the original work. The case was heard twice in New York, once applying UK law and once applying US law. It cited the prior UK case of Interlego v Tyco Industries (1988) in which Lord Oliver stated that “Skill, labour or judgement merely in the process of copying cannot confer originality.”

“What is important about a drawing is what is visually significant and the re-drawing of an existing drawing […] does not make it an original artistic work, however much labour and skill may have gone into the process of reproduction […]”

The Interlego judgement had itself drawn upon another UK case two years earlier, Coca-Cola Go’s Applications, in which the House of Lords drew attention to the “undesirability” of plaintiffs seeking to expand intellectual property law beyond the purpose of its creation in order to create an “undeserving monopoly”. It commented on this, that “To accord an independent artistic copyright to every such reproduction would be to enable the period of artistic copyright in what is, essentially, the same work to be extended indefinitely… ”

The Bridgeman case concluded that whether under UK or US law, such reproductions of copyright-expired material were not capable of being copyrighted.

The unsuccessful plaintiff, Bridgeman Art Library, stated in 2006 in written evidence to the House of Commons Committee on Culture, Media and Sport that it was “looking for a similar test case in the U.K. or Europe to fight which would strengthen our position”.

The National Portrait Gallery is a non-departmental public body based in London England and sponsored by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. Founded in 1856, it houses a collection of portraits of historically important and famous British people. The gallery contains more than 11,000 portraits and 7,000 light-sensitive works in its Primary Collection, 320,000 in the Reference Collection, over 200,000 pictures and negatives in the Photographs Collection and a library of around 35,000 books and manuscripts. (More on the National Portrait Gallery here)

The gallery’s solicitors are Farrer & Co LLP, of London. Farrer’s clients have notably included the British Royal Family, in a case related to extracts from letters sent by Diana, Princess of Wales which were published in a book by ex-butler Paul Burrell. (In that case, the claim was deemed unlikely to succeed, as the extracts were not likely to be in breach of copyright law.)

Farrer & Co have close ties with industry interest groups related to copyright law. Peter Wienand, Head of Intellectual Property at Farrer & Co., is a member of the Executive body of the Museums Copyright Group, which is chaired by Tom Morgan, Head of Rights and Reproductions at the National Portrait Gallery. The Museums Copyright Group acts as a lobbying organization for “the interests and activities of museums and galleries in the area of [intellectual property rights]”, which reacted strongly against the Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. case.

Wikimedia Commons is a repository of images, media, and other material free for use by anyone in the world. It is operated by a community of 21,000 active volunteers, with specialist rights such as deletion and blocking restricted to around 270 experienced users in the community (known as “administrators”) who are trusted by the community to use them to enact the wishes and policies of the community. Commons is hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation, a charitable body whose mission is to make available free knowledge and historic and other material which is legally distributable under US law. (More on Commons here)

The legal threat also sparked discussions of moral issues and issues of public policy in several Internet discussion fora, including Slashdot, over the weekend. One major public policy issue relates to how the public domain should be preserved.

Some of the public policy debate over the weekend has echoed earlier opinions presented by Kenneth Hamma, the executive director for Digital Policy at the J. Paul Getty Trust. Writing in D-Lib Magazine in November 2005, Hamma observed:

“Art museums and many other collecting institutions in this country hold a trove of public-domain works of art. These are works whose age precludes continued protection under copyright law. The works are the result of and evidence for human creativity over thousands of years, an activity museums celebrate by their very existence. For reasons that seem too frequently unexamined, many museums erect barriers that contribute to keeping quality images of public domain works out of the hands of the general public, of educators, and of the general milieu of creativity. In restricting access, art museums effectively take a stand against the creativity they otherwise celebrate. This conflict arises as a result of the widely accepted practice of asserting rights in the images that the museums make of the public domain works of art in their collections.”

He also stated:

“This resistance to free and unfettered access may well result from a seemingly well-grounded concern: many museums assume that an important part of their core business is the acquisition and management of rights in art works to maximum return on investment. That might be true in the case of the recording industry, but it should not be true for nonprofit institutions holding public domain art works; it is not even their secondary business. Indeed, restricting access seems all the more inappropriate when measured against a museum’s mission — a responsibility to provide public access. Their charitable, financial, and tax-exempt status demands such. The assertion of rights in public domain works of art — images that at their best closely replicate the values of the original work — differs in almost every way from the rights managed by the recording industry. Because museums and other similar collecting institutions are part of the private nonprofit sector, the obligation to treat assets as held in public trust should replace the for-profit goal. To do otherwise, undermines the very nature of what such institutions were created to do.”

Hamma observed in 2005 that “[w]hile examples of museums chasing down digital image miscreants are rare to non-existent, the expectation that museums might do so has had a stultifying effect on the development of digital image libraries for teaching and research.”

The NPG, which has been taking action with respect to these images since at least 2005, is a public body. It was established by Act of Parliament, the current Act being the Museums and Galleries Act 1992. In that Act, the NPG Board of Trustees is charged with maintaining “a collection of portraits of the most eminent persons in British history, of other works of art relevant to portraiture and of documents relating to those portraits and other works of art”. It also has the tasks of “secur[ing] that the portraits are exhibited to the public” and “generally promot[ing] the public’s enjoyment and understanding of portraiture of British persons and British history through portraiture both by means of the Board’s collection and by such other means as they consider appropriate”.

Several commentators have questioned how the NPG’s statutory goals align with its threat of legal action. Mike Masnick, founder of Techdirt, asked “The people who run the Gallery should be ashamed of themselves. They ought to go back and read their own mission statement[. …] How, exactly, does suing someone for getting those portraits more attention achieve that goal?” (external link Masnick’s). L. Sutherland of Bigmouthmedia asked “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?”

Other public policy debates that have been sparked have included the applicability of U.K. courts, and U.K. law, to the actions of a U.S. citizen, residing in the U.S., uploading files to servers hosted in the U.S.. Two major schools of thought have emerged. Both see the issue as encroachment of one legal system upon another. But they differ as to which system is encroaching. One view is that the free culture movement is attempting to impose the values and laws of the U.S. legal system, including its case law such as Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp., upon the rest of the world. Another view is that a U.K. institution is attempting to control, through legal action, the actions of a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil.

David Gerard, former Press Officer for Wikimedia UK, the U.K. chapter of the Wikimedia Foundation, which has been involved with the “Wikipedia Loves Art” contest to create free content photographs of exhibits at the Victoria and Albert Museum, stated on Slashdot that “The NPG actually acknowledges in their letter that the poster’s actions were entirely legal in America, and that they’re making a threat just because they think they can. The Wikimedia community and the WMF are absolutely on the side of these public domain images remaining in the public domain. The NPG will be getting radioactive publicity from this. Imagine the NPG being known to American tourists as somewhere that sues Americans just because it thinks it can.”

Benjamin Crowell, a physics teacher at Fullerton College in California, stated that he had received a letter from the Copyright Officer at the NPG in 2004, with respect to the picture of the portrait of Isaac Newton used in his physics textbooks, that he publishes in the U.S. under a free content copyright licence, to which he had replied with a pointer to Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp..

The Wikimedia Foundation takes a similar stance. Erik Möller, the Deputy Director of the US-based Wikimedia Foundation wrote in 2008 that “we’ve consistently held that faithful reproductions of two-dimensional public domain works which are nothing more than reproductions should be considered public domain for licensing purposes”.

Contacted over the weekend, the NPG issued a statement to Wikinews:

“The National Portrait Gallery is very strongly committed to giving access to its Collection. In the past five years the Gallery has spent around £1 million digitising its Collection to make it widely available for study and enjoyment. We have so far made available on our website more than 60,000 digital images, which have attracted millions of users, and we believe this extensive programme is of great public benefit.
“The Gallery supports Wikipedia in its aim of making knowledge widely available and we would be happy for the site to use our low-resolution images, sufficient for most forms of public access, subject to safeguards. However, in March 2009 over 3000 high-resolution files were appropriated from the National Portrait Gallery website and published on Wikipedia without permission.
“The Gallery is very concerned that potential loss of licensing income from the high-resolution files threatens its ability to reinvest in its digitisation programme and so make further images available. It is one of the Gallery’s primary purposes to make as much of the Collection available as possible for the public to view.
“Digitisation involves huge costs including research, cataloguing, conservation and highly-skilled photography. Images then need to be made available on the Gallery website as part of a structured and authoritative database. To date, Wikipedia has not responded to our requests to discuss the issue and so the National Portrait Gallery has been obliged to issue a lawyer’s letter. The Gallery remains willing to enter into a dialogue with Wikipedia.

In fact, Matthew Bailey, the Gallery’s (then) Assistant Picture Library Manager, had already once been in a similar dialogue. Ryan Kaldari, an amateur photographer from Nashville, Tennessee, who also volunteers at the Wikimedia Commons, states that he was in correspondence with Bailey in October 2006. In that correspondence, according to Kaldari, he and Bailey failed to conclude any arrangement.

Jay Walsh, the Head of Communications for the Wikimedia Foundation, which hosts the Commons, called the gallery’s actions “unfortunate” in the Foundation’s statement, issued on Tuesday July 14:

“The mission of the Wikimedia Foundation is to empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally. To that end, we have very productive working relationships with a number of galleries, archives, museums and libraries around the world, who join with us to make their educational materials available to the public.
“The Wikimedia Foundation does not control user behavior, nor have we reviewed every action taken by that user. Nonetheless, it is our general understanding that the user in question has behaved in accordance with our mission, with the general goal of making public domain materials available via our Wikimedia Commons project, and in accordance with applicable law.”

The Foundation added in its statement that as far as it was aware, the NPG had not attempted “constructive dialogue”, and that the volunteer community was presently discussing the matter independently.

In part, the lack of past agreement may have been because of a misunderstanding by the National Portrait Gallery of Commons and Wikipedia’s free content mandate; and of the differences between Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, the Wikimedia Commons, and the individual volunteer workers who participate on the various projects supported by the Foundation.

Like Coetzee, Ryan Kaldari is a volunteer worker who does not represent Wikipedia or the Wikimedia Commons. (Such representation is impossible. Both Wikipedia and the Commons are endeavours supported by the Wikimedia Foundation, and not organizations in themselves.) Nor, again like Coetzee, does he represent the Wikimedia Foundation.

Kaldari states that he explained the free content mandate to Bailey. Bailey had, according to copies of his messages provided by Kaldari, offered content to Wikipedia (naming as an example the photograph of John Opie‘s 1797 portrait of Mary Wollstonecraft, whose copyright term has since expired) but on condition that it not be free content, but would be subject to restrictions on its distribution that would have made it impossible to use by any of the many organizations that make use of Wikipedia articles and the Commons repository, in the way that their site-wide “usable by anyone” licences ensures.

The proposed restrictions would have also made it impossible to host the images on Wikimedia Commons. The image of the National Portrait Gallery in this article, above, is one such free content image; it was provided and uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation Licence, and is thus able to be used and republished not only on Wikipedia but also on Wikinews, on other Wikimedia Foundation projects, as well as by anyone in the world, subject to the terms of the GFDL, a license that guarantees attribution is provided to the creators of the image.

As Commons has grown, many other organizations have come to different arrangements with volunteers who work at the Wikimedia Commons and at Wikipedia. For example, in February 2009, fifteen international museums including the Brooklyn Museum and the Victoria and Albert Museum established a month-long competition where users were invited to visit in small teams and take high quality photographs of their non-copyright paintings and other exhibits, for upload to Wikimedia Commons and similar websites (with restrictions as to equipment, required in order to conserve the exhibits), as part of the “Wikipedia Loves Art” contest.

Approached for comment by Wikinews, Jim Killock, the executive director of the Open Rights Group, said “It’s pretty clear that these images themselves should be in the public domain. There is a clear public interest in making sure paintings and other works are usable by anyone once their term of copyright expires. This is what US courts have recognised, whatever the situation in UK law.”

The Digital Britain report, issued by the U.K.’s Department for Culture, Media, and Sport in June 2009, stated that “Public cultural institutions like Tate, the Royal Opera House, the RSC, the Film Council and many other museums, libraries, archives and galleries around the country now reach a wider public online.” Culture minster Ben Bradshaw was also approached by Wikinews for comment on the public policy issues surrounding the on-line availability of works in the public domain held in galleries, re-raised by the NPG’s threat of legal action, but had not responded by publication time.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=U.K._National_Portrait_Gallery_threatens_U.S._citizen_with_legal_action_over_Wikimedia_images&oldid=4379037”

‘Jelly bellies’ memo costs Florida police chief his job

Thursday, November 2, 2006

Winter Haven, Florida police chief Paul Goward was tired of seeing fat hanging out over the belts of some of his officers. So he posted a memo to encourage the so-called ‘jelly bellies’ to get in shape.

The memo, entitled ‘Are You A Jelly Belly?’ didn’t single anyone out, and, apart from the title, didn’t call anyone names.

Goward, a former deputy police chief in Wichita, wrote “If you are unfit, do yourself and everyone else a favor. See a professional about a proper diet and a fitness training program, quit smoking, limit alcohol intake…Don’t mean to offend, this is just straight talk. I owe it to you.”

It provided a list of 10 reasons cops should get fit. Goward said that overweight cops poorly represent the profession, are liable to ‘poop out’ when chasing suspects, and may have to use a higher degree of force.

In the end, Goward resigned from his position as police chief.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=%27Jelly_bellies%27_memo_costs_Florida_police_chief_his_job&oldid=434235”

Creating Your Own Virtual Art Gallery: What You Need To Create Your Own Website

By Ray Gatica

Houston, TX: Via this article, we will cover what artist need and how to go about setting up a virtual gallery for themselves on the World Wide Web. Artist can now have his or her very own galleries, even if it is on the Internet where it can be visited by virtually anyone any time.

We will cover from photographing the art to photo editing, and software needed to build a site, registering a domain to getting a web host service that will uploading the site via a web hosting service. We will cover a little bit of information on SEO for your site.

These virtual galleries are a product of our times. It has been coming for a long time. It started with the advent of the computer. But more recently due to the Internet it has come a medium for artist to showcase their art to the whole world.

Artist, Ray Gatica we will shed light on how an artist can set up his or her own virtual gallery. Gatica builds and maintains has been creating and maintaining websites. His non-commercial site is GaticaArt.com.

Of course, the first thing you will need to proceed is have a computer or access to one. Some of the software that you will need is the digital camera software, PhotoShop or similar photo-editing program. And web building programs FrontPage, Dream Weaver or similar, and of course Internet access.

Taking the photos: We start with photographing your art. Day light is the best light for taking the pics. Taking photos in daylight requires planning; you want a nice sunny day without clouds to cause shadows on the work. The best times to take photo outside are when the sun is at ten AM and around two in the afternoon – so that the sun is around thirty-five degrees on the art surface. This way the sunlight will not cause a reflection on the picture’ surface – thereby eliminating hot/bright spots or color washout.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fo8f0YD-SXE[/youtube]

Digital cameras are your friend. Opposed to the old 35 MM cameras, digital cameras make it easier to shoot your art and they can be easily uploaded to a computer, where they can be opened in a photo editing software to do the editing without losing any quality from the scanning process. An important tip: when shooting, use a camera tripod to steady the camera. This allows for sharp and properly focused pics. This is important even with the digital cameras. Also, take more than one shot, so that you will have the option pick the best one from the few.

After selecting you r best shots you have the options of using a scanner if you used the old non-digital camera. If you used a digital camera you will have the images in your computer after transferring them in. Either way the next step is to open the images in PhotoShop or comparable photo editing software. I have been using PhotoShop for over ten years. In editing the photos you may need to balance them, crop them or balance colors or sharpen/focus them a bit. You will also have to size them to whatever size you need, depending on what you will use them for. For Shows they usually have to be save in a certain size. The show will let you know the requirements. To size the image or canvas size go to the image or canvas size menu, you can and set the size parameters there. When done save the image in a JPG format.

Web Building Program: After all that you are ready to build your site. If you do not have a program of this type there are two that I am familiar with, FrontPAge and Dream Weaver. These programs can be found for Windows and MACs. This is more complex so you will have invest time on learning the programs. To learn these programs find someone that can help or, take a class at your local college.

Building the site will be a series of writing content and importing images and tying in all the pages with links to form the various pages and site.

The site should also include assorted pages with your art and biography, Press articles, and as much related literary content you can put together. Websites are about a lot of content, so the best way to set up a site is to create numerous pages with content. See SEO Below.

After building the site with all your images you will have to register a domain name: for your Universal Resource Locator (URL). Your specific domain name will be your address in the World Wide Web. This is what you will promote and. how people will find you on the net. For this do a search for ‘domain name hosting’ and some service providers will show up. On the average, the price for a domain name is around $10.00 per year.

After you have a domain name, and you have Internet access, you will require a web hosting service to upload to the Internet. There are numerous host provider services out there that also provide the hosting service. I use a company name Dotster. I have been pleased with them since they always answer the phone when I need help. When uploading the site for the first time you will need the hosting service to set up your service with pass words, username, and pertinent connection numbers.

After seeing you website on the Internet review it and make editions and make sure all the links work. I recommend you keep your site up and to date. It is recommended by Internet Marketing experts to keep loading content as frequent as possible, consistently.

Finally there is something called Search Engine Optimization (SEO), this is a relatively new concept to me, but it is the most important since the success of your website depends on it. To find out more about this do a search for Internet marketing and, Search Engine Optimization.

Gatica’s approach to building a site is: KISS ‘Keep it Simple Sonny’.

I like a clean, basic, straightforward website without extra unnecessary material that will slow down a site’s load-up time. Flashy, memory-laden graphics increase download time and are very frustrating to visitors to your site when they have to wait more than needed. I do not believe it benefits the site owners to have superfluous material. It is best if you build a site with information and literary content.

Artist Ray Gatica builds and maintains sites. You can see some of his site at airbrushmagic.net, muralsandbigart.com and the afore mentioned one.

Good Luck!

About the Author: A professional graphic designer in Houston, Ray Gatica designs logos, graphics, a variety of businesses; Artist Ray Gatica builds and maintains sites. You can see some of his site at

airbrushmagic.net

,

muralsandbigart.com

Source:

isnare.com

Permanent Link:

isnare.com/?aid=700805&ca=Arts+and+Crafts

Canadian jail inmates used nail clippers to escape, report finds

Friday, March 13, 2009

According to a government report released on Tuesday, six inmates of a Regina, Saskatchewan jail managed to escape last summer after spending four months using nail clippers and other makeshift instruments to break out.

We didn’t think we would get away with it

The report stated that no fewer than 87 prison guards had supervised the inmates’ unit, but did not discover the prisoners’ escape plans.

The inmates, four of whom had faced murder charges, used the instruments to remove a steel plate and grill, and finally break through with a shower rod, reaching an exterior brick wall. The inmates used sheets and blankets to climb up the exterior walls of the compound.

Some of the prisoners played cards at a table in the corridor to block the guards’ view.

The prisoners were later caught and sent back to prison. “We didn’t think we would get away with it. We started working on it. It was something to do and we just kept at it. When we didn’t get caught, we picked our night and just went,” said one of the escapees to the team investigating the incident.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Canadian_jail_inmates_used_nail_clippers_to_escape,_report_finds&oldid=788881”

Indonesian blackout caused by lack of generation capacity

Saturday, August 20, 2005

A power outage in Indonesia that left about 100 million people without electricity has caused a political crisis. The country’s state-owned energy monopoly, PLN, has not determined the immediate cause, and the country’s president has ordered the national intelligence agency and police to investigate.

The blackout appears related to deficiencies in Indonesia’s power generation capacity.

The power failure follows attempts to deal with the country’s growing energy crisis, including conservation and trying to allow private companies to provide energy, which was ruled unconstitutional in 2004. In January, the Indonesian government held a special energy summit to attract investment in their energy infrastructure. At the summit they set the goal of adding 22,000 megawatts to Indonesia’s present capacity of 23,000 megawatts, in order to support the country’s growth.

The World Bank and others have warned that without more investment in the country’s energy infrastructure an energy deficit will result. However, foreign investors remain wary of investing in Indonesia. “The power outage has resulted in worries over an energy crisis which could hurt the nation’s industrial sector,” said a trader on Indonesia’s stock market.[1]

The outage began at 10:23 a.m. local time, August 18, 2005, when power failed along the electrical system that connects Java, Bali, and Madura, causing outages in Java and Bali. Almost half of the country depends on the electrical grid that experienced failures. Some of the main lines on the grid are over 20 years old, according to PLN president Eddie Widiono.

The blackout caused traffic jams in Jakarta, forced cancellation of several international and domestic flights at Jakarta’s Soekarno-Hatta International Airport, shut down Jakarta’s electric train service, and disrupted hospital operations. Some larger hospitals were forced to delay surgeries while many smaller hospitals could not receive patients. About 1,800 officers were called into action by Jakarta’s metropolitan police to deal with short-term problems caused by the power failure.

Candles used in place of electric lighting started six fires in Jakarta alone.

Mulyo Aji, a PLN official, said more power failures are likely in the future as energy demand increases, without any corresponding new supplies of electricity scheduled to come online soon.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Indonesian_blackout_caused_by_lack_of_generation_capacity&oldid=4615738”

US President Obama authorizes airstrikes against ISIL in Iraq

Friday, August 8, 2014

United States President Barack Obama appeared in the State Dining Room at the White House Thursday night saying he was authorizing two operations in Iraq against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) insurgency. They were launched to help religious minorities who are trapped on a mountain without food and water that are “facing almost certain death,” according to Obama.

The first operation is targeted airstrikes against ISIL, and the second operation is to provide humanitarian aid to those trapped on the mountain. Regarding the airstrikes Obama said, “We intend to stay vigilant, and take action if these terrorist forces threaten our personnel or facilities anywhere in Iraq, including our consulate in Erbil and our embassy in Baghdad.” He added, “We’re also providing urgent assistance to Iraqi government and Kurdish forces so they can more effectively wage the fight against ISIL.”

In regards to the humanitarian aid operation, which had already started before Obama made the announcement, he said, “Second, at the request of the Iraqi government — we’ve begun operations to help save Iraqi civilians stranded on the mountain.” He continued saying, “Already, American aircraft have begun conducting humanitarian airdrops of food and water to help these desperate men, women and children survive.”

I will not allow the United States to be dragged into fighting another war in Iraq.

Obama empathized that ground troops will not be returning to Iraq saying, “As Commander-in-Chief, I will not allow the United States to be dragged into fighting another war in Iraq. And so even as we support Iraqis as they take the fight to these terrorists, American combat troops will not be returning to fight in Iraq, because there’s no American military solution to the larger crisis in Iraq.” Currently, there are 700 US soldiers in Iraq, mostly there to guard the US embassy and the international airport in Baghdad, facilities in Erbil, and to assess the capabilities of the Iraqi military.

The humanitarian airdrops were undertaken by “a C-17 Globemaster III and two C-130 Hercules airlifters escorted by [F/A-18] Super Hornets,” according to the Department of Defense.

According to a statement sent out by Rear Admiral John Kirby, the Pentagon’s press secretary, “Two F/A-18 aircraft dropped 500-pound laser-guided bombs on a mobile artillery piece near Erbil. ISIL was using this artillery to shell Kurdish forces defending Erbil where U.S. personnel are located,” early Friday morning.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=US_President_Obama_authorizes_airstrikes_against_ISIL_in_Iraq&oldid=4091573”