--- Erik Moeller eloquence@gmail.com wrote:
Wikimedia
The definition makes it easy to resolve the question of which licenses to allow or disallow across projects. For example, a Wikimedia-wide policy could be that: "All content in all projects must be free content as per the Free Content Definition 1.0, with the exception of works which are used under exemptions granted by national copyright laws, such as 'fair use' in the United States. These exemptions are defined on a per-project and per-language basis."
I have a problem with Wikimedia adopting this proposal as Wikisource certainly has a place for documents availble under licences forbidding modification. I do not have specific examples in mind, but we already have policy of protecting all works from modification once they have been proofread to a certain degree. I wonder if your awarenes of this issue was behind the reason Wikisource was excluded from your breakdown of the ramications of the definition on each project. I can understand why you would want to define "free content" in this way, however I am strongly against Wikimedia adopting this definition as policy across projects.
Birgitte SB
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com