Steve Bennett wrote:
On 8/7/06, Anthony wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
<snip>
Looking at the rest of the snippet though, I see "Open source refers to both a model of software development and an ideology of intellectual property." There again are those two things which I think are the most striking difference(s) in Wikipedia.
I don't think most Wikipedians are open source fanatics.
No, but Wikipedia has certainly opened us up to such things :) It's a great example of "open source really can work".
And I don't think Wikipedia being "closed source" (say there were no db dumps, contributors retained full copyright over contributions, and there was no GFDL in play) would radically alter anything.
For the most part, contributors still /do/ retain fully copyright; but if you made it "one author per article" we'd become E2.
It would reduce the motivation for many contributors, but it would not actively interfere with getting the job done.
I disagree on the second point.