He's mistaken. There is no mechanism in place for generating income from
the domains
. Commentators also need to
differentiate between the site (which physically hosts the servers) and the
domain names. WMUK's interest in QRpedia is in finding ways to ensure that
the service provided remains secure and free in perpetuity.
--
Doug
On 17 September 2012 23:05, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 8:39 PM, Andreas Kolbe
<jayen466(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 8:37 PM, Chris Keating
<
chriskeatingwiki(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I understand the QRpedia software is freely reusable under the MIT
License, today. In other words – people in Brazil
or India are able to use
the QRpedia technology too, aren't they? And they will always be able to
use it whenever they want, without ever having to ask the current rights
holders or Wikimedia UK for permission first, correct?
Correct.
To further clarify - we are not really talking about intellectual
property rights. We are talking about the domains currently used to provide
the qrpedia service, which are
qrpedia.org and
qrwp.org.
Thanks Chris. That makes more sense. :)
Actually, one more question. Chris Owen says on the DYK talk page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#Potential_abuse_of…
that Roger is apparently being *paid for the use of these domains*, which
I understand link the users of mobile devices to Wikipedia content. Does
that mean that, once the transfer of these sites to Wikimedia UK is
complete, Wikimedia UK will be charging customers of these sites to
generate revenue? Or will QRpedia thereafter be a free encyclopedia?
Or is Chris Owen altogether mistaken about QRpedia being a paid service?
Andreas
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK:
http://uk.wikimedia.org