<snipped>
---
Here are some reasoning I can
think of quickly. It is about
cost-benefit balance.
1) If providing the dictionary
for free leads to more usage,
and more societal benefits
than the revenue expected from
the usage, that is quite possibly
a good reason to provide it for free
of charge.
2) If there is a good chance that
the content could be modified
and/ or disseminated even more
widely, then free licensing would
make sense.
a) imported to Korean Wikipedia
to reach more people
b) print version is created and sold
widely
c) translations could be
juxtaposed to the original for
language learners
d) photos and drawings could be
inserted for children
---
Answers to two questions that I heard
from time to time:
Q1. Can we still make money?
Q2. How can we assure accuracy
if we allow modifications?
A1.
The government can still
make some money if they want to.
They can create "authoritative
editions" and sell them commercially.
If they choose CC-BY 3.0 Unported,
as opposed to CC-BY-SA 3.0 Unported,
the authoritative editions could be
provided as "all rights reserved".
Many individual entries may remain
free-licensed. But overall work
would be non-free.
Another thing they can do is to
provide an API /content feed for
money, so that major web sites
can purchase it, provide dictionary
service for their users.
A2.
Government people may worry that
some people would change the
content if they allow modification.
Some modification, like translation and
inserting photos, are useful for
the society.
If the authentic edition is widely
available online, it is relatively easy
for people to spot the difference.
Harmful changes could be found
this way by many people.
There are other things I can write
about, but I guess it is a bit too long
already for an email. Hope some of
these helps!
Best,
Tomos (a Japanese Wikimedian)