It would seem that it is not so narrow a case, since that is precisely the
problem.
On 7/5/06, Delirium <delirium(a)hackish.org> wrote:
Jimmy Wales wrote:
The important message I want to give here: this is
not an issue of the
foundation versus the community, but rather about an individual versus
both the community and the foundation. We should have been told first,
there should have been a discussion and some consideration given to a
number of important factors.
I agree only in the very narrow case of the use of the trademarked name
"Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.", and possibly any logos if they were used.
I hope that was the complaint to Lula.
In the more general case, the entire *point* of the GFDL is that you
*don't* need the permission or approval of the original author to
republish in any form you see fit. It might be nice to consult with
them, but we absolutely can not and should not prevent people from
unilaterally printing books.
-Mark
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--
Brad Patrick
General Counsel & Interim Executive Director
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
bradp.wmf(a)gmail.com
727-231-0101