Wikimedia-l December 2007

wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

163 participants
159 discussions

[Foundation-l] Translations of Free Cultural Works Definition
by Erik Moeller 04 Dec '07

04 Dec '07

The Definition of Free Cultural Works is in the process of being translated into 20 languages -- it is the basis of the Wikimedia Foundation's licensing policy. http://freedomdefined.org/Definition http://freedomdefined.org/Translations Translations in Czech, Greek, Finish, German, and Swedish need final review from an independent reader; other languages are in progress. Please help to translate this key document into as many languages as possible. :-) Thanks, Erik

1 0

[Foundation-l] CC-BY-SA migration checklist
by Erik Moeller 04 Dec '07

04 Dec '07

Wikimedia has a strong tradition of consensus building, so I'd like to refactor some of the comments into a kind of checklist of things we may want to see done/resolved before migrating Wikimedia projects from GFDL to CC-BY-SA. Here's a first stab: [ ] A "statement of intent" for the CC-BY-SA license. This could address, in my view, some of the concerns regarding Creative Commons' future stewardship of the license. If there was a clear statement that summarized the goals of a share-alike/copyleft license succinctly, then CC could also make a commitment to only change the license itself in accordance with that statement. [ ] A clear path forward regarding copyleft on embedded media. Mind you, I would argue that the current (FDL) situation is already ambiguous and complicated. Furthermore, one could make the point that this is not strictly a requirement for migrating the _text_, but it could be a requirement for migrating uploaded media. There basically seem to be two options under consideration: either clearly making CC-BY-SA a strong copyleft license, or making a separate license that meets those needs. [ ] An improved attribution clause that works for wikis, e.g. some version of http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/GFDL_suggestions#Attribution_requirements_fo… [ ] Some improvements to the CC-BY-SA "frontpage" which includes the license summary. In addition to any clarifications that might be desirable, I've discussed with Larry before the possibility of clearly labeling CC-BY-SA as a "libre" license, in accordance with the definition at freedomdefined.org -- he has expressed support for this idea. Anything else? -- Toward Peace, Love & Progress: Erik DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.

4 6

[Foundation-l] What's wrong with CC-BY-SA?
by Anthony 04 Dec '07

04 Dec '07

On Dec 1, 2007 2:52 PM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Dec 1, 2007 10:00 AM, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > http://blog.jamendo.com/index.php/2007/12/01/breaking-news-wikipedia-switch… > > > > I've emailed the comcom and Jimbo asking for the first-hand details. > > This is interesting. I, for one, have explicitly rejected the > creative commons cc-by-sa licensing terms. > I'm splitting this out to a new thread because I think it's important and can be discussed now, regardless of the exact path that's taken. What problem do you have with CC-BY-SA? Personally, I like the basic concept (do what you want as long as you attribute others, derivatives must be under the same license), but I'm not familiar with the nitty-gritty details. There were some complaints in particular with the newer versions of CC-BY-SA, which I don't recall, but which possibly could be addressed before the compatibility is put into place. But, in order to have any chance of this, we need to get a list of complaints. What problems do people have with CC-BY-SA? I'm asking this of everyone on the list.

20 55

Re: [Foundation-l] Simple solution to the GFDL/CC-by-SA issue
by Mike Godwin 04 Dec '07

04 Dec '07

Anthony writes: > Is that all this is, a Foundation request? It has certainly been > portrayed by some as a lot more than that. > > Is this an approved deal, or just a request? Or something in-between? It's something in-between. What WMF's request signifies is that negotiations among the three sets of stakeholders are pretty close to complete. --Mike

1 0

Re: [Foundation-l] Simple solution to the GFDL/CC-by-SA issue
by Mike Godwin 03 Dec '07

03 Dec '07

Jon writes: > Why not, in the next GFDL version, just remove the > clause that says you have to include the entire license, and just > say it's > sufficient to state that the material is GFDL and credit the > author(s) in > the appropriate manner? Wouldn't that - for the everyday person - > accomplish > exactly the same as switching to CC-by-SA? I think FSF's modifying the GFDL so that it is a functional equivalent of CC-BY-SA is a possible path for FSF if they want to respond to the Foundation's request. --Mike

3 2

[Foundation-l] Simple solution to the GFDL/CC-by-SA issue
by Jon Harald Søby 03 Dec '07

03 Dec '07

I'm just a layman, so this post might be extremely naïve and short-minded of me, but I'll go ahead and post it anyways. As far as I can understand, the main problem we have with the GFDL is that you have to include the entire text of the license if you want to use something that is GFDL. Why not, in the next GFDL version, just remove the clause that says you have to include the entire license, and just say it's sufficient to state that the material is GFDL and credit the author(s) in the appropriate manner? Wouldn't that - for the everyday person - accomplish exactly the same as switching to CC-by-SA? -- Jon Harald Søby http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jon_Harald_S%C3%B8by

3 2

[Foundation-l] GFDL/CC announcement?
by David Gerard 03 Dec '07

03 Dec '07

http://blog.jamendo.com/index.php/2007/12/01/breaking-news-wikipedia-switch… I've emailed the comcom and Jimbo asking for the first-hand details. - d.

16 27

[Foundation-l] Project announcement: Indywikia, visually browsing wikipedia!
by Markos Gogoulos 03 Dec '07

03 Dec '07

Hi all, I would like to give you a pointer to indywikia project. Indywikia is an open source project that aims to browse wikipedia on an intuitive and different way! Article's images are displayed in tenths, plus the ones of related articles, thus one can quickly get an idea what the article is about, or discover related ones! Text is split on titles, links, paragraphs blocks. Hope that you will find the project interesting! http://indywikia.sourceforge.net Regards, Markos Gogoulos

3 2

[Foundation-l] Fwd: [Wikimedia Advisory Board] License update resolution
by Mike Godwin 02 Dec '07

02 Dec '07

Forwarded by permission from the Wikimedia Advisory Board list. --Mike Begin forwarded message: > From: Wayne Mackintosh <wmackintosh(a)col.org> > Date: December 2, 2007 1:00:25 PM EST > To: advisory(a)lists.wikimedia.org > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Advisory Board] License update resolution > Reply-To: advisory(a)lists.wikimedia.org > > This is an important debate and I am very pleased to see this > filtering through into our Advisory Board list. > > The WMF is one of but a few organisations that has clearly defined > what it means by "free" in its licensing policy. We have a clear > definition of its meaning in our licensing policy (http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Licensing_policy > ) underpinned by the principles of the Free Cultural Works > definition (http://freedomdefined.org/Definition ) > > Apart from being the largest encyclopedia in the history of human > kind <smile> - WMF has established a global leadership role by > defining what we mean by free content, but more importantly the > values which underpin it. Free content is different from free > software. It has unique characteristics which are more than > adequately covered in the Free Cultural Works definition. (As an > international agency - COL's small free content initiative > subscribes to the free cultural works definition). > > Sadly the free knowledge community is facing a difficult challenge > in our collective history. We are at risk of fuelling factions > within the free knowledge community that push their particular > "brand" of free content license at the expense of the greater vision > of free knowledge for all. I've also seen calls for a new license > for the education sector -- crazy. > > It is ludicrous that in this day an age - free content content using > License A cannot legally be mixed with Free Content under License B > and then released as a modified work under License B. Sure there are > justifiable historical reasons for this situation. This is why WMF > must show bold and decisive leadership in uniting the free knowledge > movement together. We cannot afford to fuel license factions at the > risk of realising the vision of free knowledge for all. That said - > resolving this challenge must be founded on the essential freedoms. > > The evolution of free content license factions (in my view) will > stun the growth of free knowledge and rob us of our most powerful > lever -- the fact that digital knowledge is infinitely scalable. > > I agree with Mako -- these issues must be determined by the real > freedom issues rather than idiosyncrasies. For example, the > seductive allure to argue our position from the perspective of > commercial versus non-commercial motivations, while tempting and > emotionally powerful, is risky because this will erode the > principled foundations on which we draw our meaning of freedom. For > example, within our projects - WikiNews already uses a CC > Attribution license (i.e. without the viral clause). So we have a > double president - using two brands of license among our projects > and one project without a copyleft clause. Fortunately this > situation can be defended drawing on the foundations of the > essential freedoms. > > It is unfortunate how interpretations of this Board resolution have > filtered through the popular digital media ..;-(. But hey, tall > trees like Wikipedia do catch a lot of wind and you can't unring a > bell <smile>. > > The Board volunteers will bear the brunt of managing the traffic > this will generate. I commend the Board's dedication and commitment > to the vision of free knowledge. Hang in their - we will be a better > world will be a better place for your efforts! > > If there is anyway I can assist from the outside as an Advisory > Board member in the educational perspectives around free content > licensing. Feel free to ask. > > Cheers > Wayne > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, 2007-12-02 at 12:36 +0100, Benj. Mako Hill wrote: >> >> <quote who="Mike Godwin" date="Sat, Dec 01, 2007 at 10:31:24PM >> -0500"> >> > At any rate, my own view is wholly supportive of FSF, GPL, and >> GDFL, >> > even though I also favor harmonization of GFDL with CC-BY-SA >> somewhere >> > down the road. >> >> Absolutely. This is my position as well. But in order to do that, >> it's >> important we successfully determine between the real freedom issues >> and >> the things that are annoying or merely idiosyncratic. Unless we >> establish that there are no fundamental differences from a principled >> position, migration between these license would be irresponsible. >> >> Regards, >> Mako >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Advisory mailing list >> Advisory(a)lists.wikimedia.org >> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory > _______________________________________________ > Advisory mailing list > Advisory(a)lists.wikimedia.org > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory

1 0

[Foundation-l] Licensing for Dummies
by Philippe Beaudette 02 Dec '07

02 Dec '07

Hi all - OK, I accept that I need to get copies of the various licenses and crash with them and dig into them. Gottit. It's on my "to-do" list for next week. Is there a good common reference that I can use in addition to that? I'm thinking there must be someone who's already done this and has harnessed the (substantial) knowledge of this list and others to put them into a format that doesn't make my eyes glaze. Does anyone have a reference that gives overviews of the various differences b/w the CC licenses, the GFDL, etc? Philippe ________________________ Philippe Beaudette Tulsa, OK http://www.freerice.com - play the game, feed a hungry person.

6 5

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Wikimedia-l December 2007