--- Gregory Maxwell gmaxwell@gmail.com wrote:
On 5/1/06, Erik Moeller eloquence@gmail.com wrote: [snip]
It is this distinction between two classes of
content which is
essential. You, on the other hand, want to put ND
content on equal
footing with other materials. This erodes the
distinction, reduces the
incentive to contribute free content, and
contradicts the definition
and mission of Wikisource.
I think this point of Erik's is the most important.
The reason that ND content should not be broadly accepted on any Wikimedia project is that the only cases where we are able to obtain an ND grant are cases where we also have a high probaiblity of getting a free grant.
Content which forbids derivied works is not anymore free content than content you can use but not distribute. Both are without cost, both deny you what would be considered natural rights without copyright, and both go far beyond the limited restrictions required to keep content free and far beyond what is needed to avoid people being confused by content degraded by later editors.
When we accept kinda-free works it is at the cost of actually free works.
There are many sites out there which are happy to distribute free-of-cost content, Wikimedia doesn't need to yet another.
If someone can really make the case that there are works which could never be free but can instead be ND, then make it... And expect the counter argument "But what if I went to the copyright holder and overed him $100,000 USD to free his work"? Because thats a perfectly valid counter argument.
The works I see us dealing with here are religous works, goverment works, and manifestos of political groups etc. These sorts of works forbid modifiction because the authors do not want to be misrepresented not because they want to profit from the work. This situation is not comparable to un-free works on Wikipedia. It does not prevent free works from being created in the same way at all. Excluding these works will not make anything more free. I am not putting ND works on the same footing as PD works; the works themselves are not comparable. This is not like a picture of a butterfly. It is not the that ND work is better quality than some PD work; each work is unique. If we realy did have a high probability of getting a free license on these works I would agree with you but I so not belive it is possible. I should really come up with some concrete examples before continuing this which will require some research, but I am for now quite unconvinced.
Birgitte SB
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com