On 22/04/2008, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> wrote: imminent, It depends whether that actually achieves the long-desired CC-by-sa compatibility. I'm not assuming that until it happens. - d. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 22/04/2008, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:

>Is the GFDL fundamentally discriminatory against the blind?

No more than many EULAs

>This in itself IMO is a strong case for porting to CC-by-sa.

Still runs into issues when faced with large numbers of authors. "keep intact all copyright notices for the Work" has the same problem with invariant sections as the GFDL.

Let's run with the idea that provoked these questions to foundation-l, and to the FSF. The most apparent one to most people here is the Spoken Articles on Wikipedia. They're from GFDL material and looking at the license as it stands, none of the people drafting it dreamt an encyclopedia - let alone audio portions thereof - would ever exist and be covered by it. Perhaps it is fortuitous that this aspect has come up before the new license is in place? Perhaps there is a wider scope to consider in drafting it? That "wider scope" is what one of the contributors to this discussion has highlighted as a seriously headache-forming area under current constraints, namely Radio. Trust me, dealing with a license that was drafted when hard-cased floppy disks were cutting-edge technology is going to give Mike Godwin headaches, not just the average list contributor. So, yes, as a few people on a few of the non-WP projects are aware, the idea that provoked these questions was indeed radio. A 24/7 MediaWiki Radio service running Wikinews new pieces, spoken Wikipedia, music from Commons, Lectures workshops and tutorials from Wikiversity, Quote of the Day from Wikiquote, and "Book of the Month" from Wikisource. As the discussion on the Communications Committee list saw this labelled, "WikiRadio 4" (See WP article on BBC Radio 4"). What are people's thoughts on this? Kicking the idea about on Wikinews' Water Cooler has made it look that filling a repeated six or eight-hour schedule is achievable within a realistic timeframe. It does not conflict with projects getting off the ground to do podcasts, but would mean they'd need advised to start working towards fitting to broadcast time constraints as a way of having an eye on the future. Could we aim for a radio station for Wikimania 2008, with Spanish lessons broadcast in the preceding weeks/months? Could we persuade Wikipedia people to add "doing a recording" to the composition of the daily main page? Brian McNeil -----Original Message----- From: foundation-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of geni Sent: 22 April 2008 19:37 To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Legal position of audio recordings of GFDLcontent? On 22/04/2008, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote: You can't but assuming you are dealing with more normal people there are ways to do it. Not the problem you might think. Obviously it will limit the formats you can use. 45s and 78s are going to be basically unusable and 33s would be fairly borderline. For CDs it is less of a problem. You have a single track dedicated to the legal stuff and everything else just as normal. If you want to put multiple articles onto a single CD then it would probably a be a good idea to take the approach of merging them into a single document. If you make a CD that is say a series of spoken versions of our US president articles then you are going to run into problems with the size of the article history but by using synthesised speech and dumping the lot on a separate CD it should be doable. In the end it's just another version of the old overhead problem that means the GFDL is useless for postcards as well. Invariant sections can of course case massive problems. If an invariant section is an image you are basically stuffed. No more than many EULAs Still runs into issues when faced with large numbers of authors. "keep intact all copyright notices for the Work" has the same problem with invariant sections as the GFDL. -- geni _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Let's run with the idea that provoked these questions to foundation-l, and to the FSF. The most apparent one to most people here is the Spoken

on Wikipedia. They're from GFDL material and looking at the license as it stands, none of the people drafting it dreamt an encyclopedia - let alone audio portions thereof - would ever exist and be covered by it. Perhaps

is fortuitous that this aspect has come up before the new license is in place? Perhaps there is a wider scope to consider in drafting it? That "wider scope" is what one of the contributors to this discussion has highlighted as a seriously headache-forming area under current

namely Radio. Trust me, dealing with a license that was drafted when hard-cased floppy disks were cutting-edge technology is going to give

Godwin headaches, not just the average list contributor. So, yes, as a few people on a few of the non-WP projects are aware, the

that provoked these questions was indeed radio. A 24/7 MediaWiki Radio service running Wikinews new pieces, spoken Wikipedia, music from

Lectures workshops and tutorials from Wikiversity, Quote of the Day from Wikiquote, and "Book of the Month" from Wikisource. As the discussion on

Communications Committee list saw this labelled, "WikiRadio 4" (See WP article on BBC Radio 4"). What are people's thoughts on this? Kicking the idea about on Wikinews' Water Cooler has made it look that filling a repeated six or eight-hour schedule is achievable within a realistic timeframe. It does not conflict with projects getting off the ground to do podcasts, but would mean

need advised to start working towards fitting to broadcast time

as a way of having an eye on the future. Could we aim for a radio station for Wikimania 2008, with Spanish lessons broadcast in the preceding weeks/months? Could we persuade Wikipedia people to add "doing a

to the composition of the daily main page? Brian McNeil -----Original Message----- From: foundation-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of geni Sent: 22 April 2008 19:37 To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Legal position of audio recordings of GFDLcontent? On 22/04/2008, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote: You can't but assuming you are dealing with more normal people there are ways to do it. Not the problem you might think. Obviously it will limit the formats you can use. 45s and 78s are going to be basically unusable and 33s would be fairly borderline. For CDs it is less of a problem. You have a single track dedicated to the legal stuff and everything else just as normal. If you want to put multiple articles onto a single CD then it would probably a be a good idea to take the approach of merging them into a single document. If you make a CD that is say a series of spoken versions of our US president articles then you are going to run into problems with the size of the article history but by using synthesised speech and dumping the lot on a separate CD it should be doable. In the end it's just another version of the old overhead problem that means the GFDL is useless for postcards as well. Invariant sections can of course case massive problems. If an invariant section is an image you are basically stuffed. No more than many EULAs Still runs into issues when faced with large numbers of authors. "keep intact all copyright notices for the Work" has the same problem with invariant sections as the GFDL. -- geni _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Of course, and I meant Wikimania 2009 not '08. Can someone tell me who would be a good couple of people from the WP podcasts and front page management to talk to?

I think it's an admirable idea, and suggest you start small and grow

No need for 8 hours off the bat, when there are zero hours now. As the longest running regularly published audio product in the Wikipedia

believe me when I say it is quite an undertaking.

I still have a question, however (which Brian and others have been addressing on Wikinews): will this be a project independent of Wikimedia servers (a la Wikipedia Weekly), will it be a project aligned to a particular Wikimedia project, or will it be a separate Wikimedia project?

From: Brian McNeil <brian.mcneil(a)wikinewsie.org> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wimimedia Radio WAS:RE: Legal position ofaudiorecordings of GFDLcontent? To: "'Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List'" <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Date: Thursday, April 24, 2008, 11:56 AM In trying to lay out an eight-hour schedule, I'm trying to lay out a framework to work within and a goal to aim for. This doesn't preclude doing podcasts right now, in fact doing them would be eminently sensible. You've just got to do them with an eye to a future where you can download them from a WMF server, catch them on our Internet radio service, or any other number of ways of getting at the content. You need to work to a more strict timescale and be able to swap in and out different intro/outro pieces for the context the material is presented in. So, on one track we work on all these, "please be less ambitious" sides of the argument. People do their podcasts and recordings as they would, but perhaps with reference to time constraints that might apply in a radio environment. Where building a library of timeless material is feasible, it gets done. Then there's the technical side of this. It certainly isn't going to happen overnight, a lot of "glue" software would need written to keep to a seamless schedule. With some of the things I see in WMF press releases we'd really be looking to run a lot of software that currently has no connection whatsoever with MediaWiki. To oversimplify to the point that a developer would wake in a cold sweat, we need an extension; one that can feed data out of a wiki and into a content generator that interfaces with a broadcast server. From some poking around that'd be Icecast and Liquidsoap. The MW extension would need to control Liquidsoap; send queries and accept responses from it as to what to play next. To state the obvious, the majority of the development time on something like this is going to have to come out of the community. Brion and his merry men are probably up to their asses in alligators trying to make sure SUL and Flagged Revisions go off smoothly. What I think is the good news is that when we do get them to look at this FLOSS stack for radio, it certainly appears to have been set up with the WMF in mind. It has a version that reminds me of squid proxies, and it looks like you could almost run this cache system as close as the last mile and have ISPs with their own server providing the stream and their main line kept free for other stuff. When the technology is in place, we start streaming. I'll be honest, if it's all Commons music to start with I don't care. Obviously, I want to see Wikinews doing the top of the hour headlines at this point, but the relevance of that is only going to increase as we bring in other projects and expand the content. The beta should see the "how to do audio" lessons from Wikiversity broadcast throughout a segment; stick in the Wikipedia podcasts on a Sunday with a Wednesday repeat... You've a radio station. If we can get to that point I think we've a project that will just grow naturally. Brian McNeil -----Original Message----- From: foundation-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of David Gerard Sent: 24 April 2008 11:06 To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wimimedia Radio WAS:RE: Legal position ofaudiorecordings of GFDLcontent? On 24/04/2008, Andrew Lih <andrew.lih(a)gmail.com> wrote: start small and grow bigger. hours now. As the the Wikipedia universe, Yeah. Anyone who's done public radio knows what a commitment a weekly radio show is. - d. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l