2012/9/5 Nadja Kutz <nadja(a)daytar.de>de>:
Is it planned by the Wikidata team that someone
phones these people in
Geneva and asks wether wikidata could at least base its ontology (here I
mean in particular the overall classification scheme, like a hammer is a
tool a.s.o) on
the ISO Standard
(eventually by purchasing this right)
phone number: http://www.iso.org/iso/copyright.htm
(in that way one would eventually not use their explicit texts and formats
but could use at least their
structural outline) ?
No, we currently do not have any plans to contact the people at ISO in
order to discuss the topic you suggest. I think in the following
answers you will find the why we do not have these plans.
side remark: In particular I still don't see that
Wikidata may not run into
legal issues with the ISO.
or simply: If the ISO has an IP protection on the classification "a hammer
is a tool"
and if wikidata uses the same classification (because it is more or less the
only one which makes sense)
then wikidata may be doomed, bailiffs will come and carry your nice new
chairs out of your office in schoeneberg
and so on....
I am not a lawyer, but I want to point out that there is a distinction
between Copyright and other IP protection. Whereas a text about the
classification of hammers may (and usually is) copyrighted, the mere
fact that a hammer is a tool can not be copyrighted.
Also, we need to make a distinction between the IP for the data model
of Wikidata and the content of Wikidata.
To give an analogy: the source code of MediaWiki is released under the
GPL. The content of Wikipedia is released under a CC license. The
discussion in this thread so far has centered around the data model
that is described here:
This data model relates to RDF or topic maps. We did not discuss
content in this thread so far, as far as I understood.
The relationship between hammers and tools would be part of the
content, not of the data model.
Is there some rich sponsor who could buy their RDF
classification (or topic
map classification..?) and
make it openly accessible? Whats the ISO opinion on that did someone check?
We did not check with the ISO on that. We did not search for sponsors
in order to fund such a data contribution. There are a number of
institutions already offering their data to Wikidata, as can be seen
In my personal opinion, appropriately answering these requests has a
higher priority than finding sponsors to buy and free further data
sources. But anyway, these are decisions that the editor community of
Wikidata has to take once Wikidata is deployed, and not a decision
that the development team can answer as it is about the content of
Wikidata. Just as the MediaWiki developers do not decide on the
content of Wikipedia, the Wikidata developers do not decide on the
content of Wikidata. I hope the distinction makes sense.
By the way, is there a specific classification that you have in mind,
or are you asking in general?
Mr. Denny Vrandecic If you still don't understand
these questions then
please tell me exactly what you do not understand like
which sentence, which word etc.
Mrs Nadja Kutz, thank you for the questions. I hope I answered them now.
Project director Wikidata
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Obentrautstr. 72 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. +49-30-219 158 26-0 | http://wikimedia.de
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg
unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das
Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.