I could not disagree more with you. People who work on Wikipedia do this
because they make a difference. This making a difference is what I think is
of paramount importance, what makes people proud of this endeavour. When
people use my pictures and my ,it makes a difference how they use it. But
essentially I do not really care as long as my ideal of more and better
information or more people is realised.
Obviously I like it that my picture of a wild boar is used on a Russian
website. They asked, nice. But I take more pride in KNOWING this than in
having my name on their website.
When I print a poster, and the license and the contributors have to be
printed on it as well, the image of the picture is spoiled for me. This
would be a reason for me to return the printed poster. So let us be
practical, WHERE do you want to have all the information that is so dear to
you? What are the costs and is this feasible.. Are you not killing the goose
that lays the golden eggs ?
2009/1/30 Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <cimonavaro(a)gmail.com>
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
I selected a great picture from Commons. I loaded it on my memory stick.
went to a copy shop and had it printed in poster
format for little money.
fuss. I did not even need to bring it on a memory
stick, I could have
downloaded the picture at the copy shop. This is the real world. There is
nothing stopping anyone from printing one of the great pictures from
I think this is the great thing about our emerging age. You
don't need to own a printing press to be able to make a book.
(of course before the printing press you needed to have a
scribe to make a book, but that it very much by the by)
With all the talk about the French chapter's
cottage village solution to
printing, the reality is that printing a poster is not a problem anyway.
Given this reality, what are we talking about. What do we think we
realistically achieve. You have to appreciate that the poster has to be
shipped, there has to be something for the French chapter and all the
overhead you think up has to be paid.
I don't think it is at all a bad thing
that wikimedias chapters
would have to face all the same obstacles as other re-users,
and of course the obstacles are all there for a reason, and
traditional copyright would not only be worse, but would make
production of something like wikipedia essentially impossible.
In another thread all kinds of
difficult theories are discussed about atribution. The more complicated
is in the real world, the more likely it is that
the chapter will end up
with very little indeed and that all this talk will only kill a goose
lays "golden" eggs.
I completely agree with your point, but I think you have grasped
the wrong end of the stick. It is precisely the pride people feel
about contributing and being acknowledged as contributing to
our great charitable work, that is laying the golden eggs.
Attribution is not a killer, it is what gives our projects life.
foundation-l mailing list