On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 1:17 AM, Gergo Tisza gtisza@wikimedia.org wrote:
Trying to make our content less free for fear that someone might misuse it is a shamefully wrong frame of mind for and organization that's supposed to be a leader of the open content movement, IMO.
Do you think there is something "shameful" about Wikipedia using the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License?
And if that isn't shameful, why would it be shameful if Wikidata used the same licence?
Attribution has a dual benefit:
1. It provides visibility for Wikimedia and the open content movement. 2. The public can see where the data comes from.
What is shameful about that?