---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Pat Gunn pgunn@dachte.org Date: 15-Dec-2006 01:26 Subject: [Foundation-l] Mozart's works released To: foundation-l@wikimedia.org
In case anybody missed it, Mozart's complete works were recently published on the internet by the (Austria-based) International Mozart Foundation. http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=internetNews&storyID...
I'm not sure what license it's under. If it's a free one (or PD-equivalent), then it's similar in a sense to several ideas raised in Jimbo's idea drive sometime back.
A thought: If it is freely licensed, to what extent should the foundation consider republishing its content on WMF projects? Should WM avoid possibly stepping on the toes of other projects, avoiding duplicating any free conttent they make, or should it try to collect everything (and possibly give prominent credit) that falls under its mission? The general question may apply to other groups like Project Gutenberg's works.
--- Pat Gunn mod: csna, bmcm, bmco, cooa, cona, clpd, coom http://dachte.org "Let's put it this way: if you need to ask a lawyer whether what you do is "right" or not, you are morally corrupt. Let's not go there. We don't base our morality on law." -- Linus Torvalds _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Hi!
In case anybody missed it, Mozart's complete works were recently published on the internet by the (Austria-based) International Mozart Foundation. http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=internetNews&storyID...
I'm not sure what license it's under. If it's a free one (or PD-equivalent), then it's similar in a sense to several ideas raised in Jimbo's idea drive sometime back.
A thought: If it is freely licensed, to what extent should the foundation consider republishing its content on WMF projects? Should WM avoid possibly stepping on the toes of other projects, avoiding duplicating any free conttent they make, or should it try to collect everything (and possibly give prominent credit) that falls under its mission? The general question may apply to other groups like Project Gutenberg's works.
Pat Gunn
It's great news, but some restrictions apply :-( See http://nma.redhost24-001.com/mambo/index.php?option=com_content&task=vie... for details. So, no blind copy, please.
With best regards, Eugene.
On 15/12/06, Eugene Zelenko eugene.zelenko@gmail.com wrote:
Hi!
In case anybody missed it, Mozart's complete works were recently published on the internet by the (Austria-based) International Mozart Foundation. http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=internetNews&storyID...
I'm not sure what license it's under. If it's a free one (or PD-equivalent), then it's similar in a sense to several ideas raised in Jimbo's idea drive sometime back.
A thought: If it is freely licensed, to what extent should the foundation consider republishing its content on WMF projects? Should WM avoid possibly stepping on the toes of other projects, avoiding duplicating any free conttent they make, or should it try to collect everything (and possibly give prominent credit) that falls under its mission? The general question may apply to other groups like Project Gutenberg's works.
Pat Gunn
It's great news, but some restrictions apply :-( See http://nma.redhost24-001.com/mambo/index.php?option=com_content&task=vie... for details. So, no blind copy, please.
Yes, sorry I was a bit hasty in fwding. They are discussing on foundation-l at the moment about whether or not it can be appropriate for Wikimedia, and how so. See http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2006-December/012138.html .
Brianna
Le Fri, 15 Dec 2006 01:35:58 +1100, Brianna Laugher a écrit:
I'm not sure what license it's under. If it's a free one (or PD-equivalent), then it's similar in a sense to several ideas raised in Jimbo's idea drive sometime back.
Its not.
They claim that the materials should be used only for educational purpose.
Though such an assertion seems excessive (it is just a digitization of public-domain work), I dont think that anybody will want to conduct legal pursuit to correct it.
Am I wrong ?