On 10/21/07, Oldak Quill <oldakquill(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
On 21/10/2007, Anthony <wikimail(a)inbox.org>
wrote:
On 10/21/07, Andrew Gray
<shimgray(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 21/10/2007, Anthony <wikimail(a)inbox.org>
wrote:
> Anyway, for all I know they've already gotten permission. Who would
> be the one to contact about this?
No idea. But they don't need permission; they are under no legal or
moral or ethical obligation to ask for it;
Wow, I'm rather surprised by that. Ohwell.
I'm not sure I understand what the problem is here.
The problem is that this book isn't free content.
A book has been
published about how to contribute to Wikipedia and some are worrying
about whether we should threaten them for using "Wikipedia" in the
title?
I'm the only one commenting on that, and I wasn't worrying about it, I
was suggesting it. Of course, Andrew Gray says it's not a viable plan
anyway.
Such a book could only help Wikipedia.
If it were free content it'd help Wikipedia even more, though.
On those counts, I agree with you - it would be far better if it were
free content (and perhaps Wikimedia could start such a project?). But
while proprietory knowledge exists and is so prevalent, I think an
extra book (whether proprietory or, preferably, free) helps.
--
Oldak Quill (oldakquill(a)gmail.com)