I am not quite sure why you might want a policyassigning all copyrights
to the Wikimedia Foundation. First, this would be an administrative
nightmare to change the licensing in midstream. Those who
have contributed to any wiki type project are doing so with the
understanding that their work can be edited, changed, etc. even
if they don't grant any kind of additional license. However, they
do not give up their copyright, with or without attribution. If they
do not grant an open license then just posting it on a wiki type space
is legally no different than writing someone a letter (though the issue of
publication may come up). Regarding anonymous and pseudononymous
works both are protected by copyright under US and foreign copyright
laws, as the case may be. The author of the letter retains copyright.
Regarding people making contributions under any kind of specific
license (be that open in the case of the WP community, or closed
in the case of AOL) it is just a license, it is not the transfer or
assignment of copyright, thus the original contributor under an
open, non-exclusive license could still sell her or his work or have
it published commercially, (without the GNU notice) though someone
who discovers that it is posted with a open license could then also
publish it commerically (as long as the GNU Free Documentation
License notice is then included).
I should also remind you that everything done on a wiki space IS
in writing, the question being who wrote it is a question of proof,
but it is written and recorded.
I am not certain why there is a discussion of assigning copyright
to the Wikimedia Foundation. Of course anyone is free to make
such a contribution (though I doubt they will get a tax deduction
for it) but it is not necessary IMHO for Wikimedia to use materials
under the open license it already has, perhaps I do not understand
the question, but what specifically cannot be acheived with the
current open license that every Wikipedia contributor grants when
they make contributions to any Wikipedia space? Is anyone really
worried that contributors will start publishing their original contributions
commercially (that includes publication by a not-for-profit corporation,
many so called "small press" publishers are exempt under 501(c)(3)
and their publications are sold in bookstores, i.e. most University
Presses).
Alex756 (the lawyer mentioned below)
>On Fri, 1 Aug 2003 07:10:47 -0700 (PDT) Karl Wick said:
>Wasn't there a lawyer who offered free services to Jimmy a
>while back ? An expert opinion would he helpful in many
>issues to make a plan that is legal and helps achieve WP
>goals and mission, such as regarding the proposed
>dedication of copyrights to the Foundation.
>--Karl