Dear all,
We would like to offer further clarification that the recommendations for Wikimedia 2030 [1] that were shared earlier with you are indeed drafts. They represent discussions around a wide array of topics that the nine thematic working groups, affiliates and communities had identified important for our movement’s future. They are the product of conversations over many months with a variety of stakeholders, and the working groups are eager to hear from you. The draft recommendations are neither final nor complete, but a continuation of an ongoing conversation happening across wikis, platforms, surveys, meetings, and meet-ups. As such, constructive feedback and solution-oriented suggestions are welcomed. The draft recommendations are based on contexts that deserve due review and reflection, and are the result of the efforts of many, rather than single individuals.
Many of the draft recommendations underline structural changes needed for the growth and expansion of a movement like ours. Many are representative of wider societal, historical and global dynamics around us. Please take the time to review the draft recommendations in their entirety, pose questions, hear from others, and in the spirit of collegial collaboration, offer suggestions that you think can address the issues at hand. This is a process for all of us to shape our shared future, together; let’s keep engaging and challenging one another in this same spirit.
Best wishes, Nicole
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommen...
On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 15:49, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com wrote:
"And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can incorporate indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the current licensing scheme?"
We can't and no one can.
Knowledge, ideas, and concepts cannot be copyrighted to begin with. Now, specific expressions of those ideas certainly can be, but the underlying facts and ideas cannot. If the expression of those ideas is to be on Wikimedia, they must be under an open content license, allowing reuse without regard to purpose. If someone would prefer to put their work under an NC license, then a free-content project is not the appropriate place for it. Many other places are happy to accept NC-licensed material. But even then, reuse of the concepts and facts cannot be prohibited no matter what one does.
Todd
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 5:47 AM Philip Kopetzky <philip.kopetzky@gmail.com
wrote:
Please don't generalise frustration with your conduct on this list.
You're
the only one telling people to shut up here.
And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can
incorporate
indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the current licensing scheme? _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe