[Foundation-l] Article in Newsweek

List overview All Threads
Download

newer

older

[Foundation-l] Access Any Web Site...

Re: [Foundation-l] GFDL and...

Brian McNeil

20 Nov 2007 20 Nov '07

8:52 a.m.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/71360/page/1 More meat than the NYT piece, and spoke to Lessig about the work to get a better license that doesn't involve including the entire GFDL. Brian McNeil

Show replies by thread

geni

20 Nov 20 Nov

12:44 p.m.

On 20/11/2007, Brian McNeil <brian.mcneil(a)wikinewsie.org> wrote:

...

http://www.newsweek.com/id/71360/page/1 More meat than the NYT piece, and spoke to Lessig about the work to get a better license that doesn't involve including the entire GFDL.

Mr Lessig is not however the person you need. RMS would appear to be the current problem. -- geni

GerardM

2:04 p.m.

Hoi, It is nice to see everyone agree that RMS is the problem in getting more and better open content collaboration going. Thanks, GerardM On Nov 20, 2007 1:44 PM, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

On 20/11/2007, Brian McNeil <brian.mcneil(a)wikinewsie.org> wrote:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/71360/page/1 More meat than the NYT piece, and spoke to Lessig about the work to get

better license that doesn't involve including the entire GFDL.

Mr Lessig is not however the person you need. RMS would appear to be the current problem. -- geni _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Brian McNeil

3:11 p.m.

The GPL and GFDL licenses have their roots in a time when the Internet was not so widely available. Many of the early uses of these licenses would be in packages you'd get passed to you on a floppy disk. I don't disagree with the idea that if you copy GFDL content into a book you put the license in an appendix. I'd actually argue that under the same circumstances with CC-BY-??? You should, not must, but should, at the very least include the summarised text of the license and an easily readable web page URL (i.e. not tiny print) that you can type in to get the full license text. [This is in the sense/context that RFC documents use "should".] I think wiki demonstrates that you need to have ideals and noble goals but temper them with a more practical approach to the real world. RMS is a little too idealistic for my tastes, but that doesn't mean you should dismiss the point he is making. Brian McNeil -----Original Message----- From: foundation-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of GerardM Sent: 20 November 2007 15:05 To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Article in Newsweek Hoi, It is nice to see everyone agree that RMS is the problem in getting more and better open content collaboration going. Thanks, GerardM On Nov 20, 2007 1:44 PM, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

On 20/11/2007, Brian McNeil <brian.mcneil(a)wikinewsie.org> wrote:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/71360/page/1 More meat than the NYT piece, and spoke to Lessig about the work to get

better license that doesn't involve including the entire GFDL.

_______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

geni

3:20 p.m.

On 20/11/2007, Brian McNeil <brian.mcneil(a)wikinewsie.org> wrote:

...

I think wiki demonstrates that you need to have ideals and noble goals but temper them with a more practical approach to the real world. RMS is a little too idealistic for my tastes, but that doesn't mean you should dismiss the point he is making.

Idealism is at this point less than a problem than inaction. We were still running mediawiki 1.8 alpha (we are now at 1.12alpha) back when the last comment of the GSFDL by the FSF appeared. -- geni

Nikola Smolenski

3:33 p.m.

GerardM wrote:

...

It is nice to see everyone agree that RMS is the problem in getting more and better open content collaboration going.

Well, he would probably disagree...

GerardM

8:37 p.m.

Hoi, I would love him to prove us wrong :) Thanks, GerardM On Nov 20, 2007 4:33 PM, Nikola Smolenski <smolensk(a)eunet.yu> wrote:

...

GerardM wrote:

It is nice to see everyone agree that RMS is the problem in getting more

and

better open content collaboration going.

Well, he would probably disagree... _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Casey Brown

21 Nov 21 Nov

1 a.m.

\o/ They provide a screenshot of a page with a fundraising banner on it! Advertising for our fundraiser. :-) On Nov 20, 2007 3:52 AM, Brian McNeil <brian.mcneil(a)wikinewsie.org> wrote:

...

http://www.newsweek.com/id/71360/page/1 More meat than the NYT piece, and spoke to Lessig about the work to get a better license that doesn't involve including the entire GFDL. Brian McNeil _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

-- Casey Brown Cbrown1023 --- Note: This e-mail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails sent to this address will probably get lost.

Jimmy Wales

8:23 p.m.

GerardM wrote:

...

Hoi, It is nice to see everyone agree that RMS is the problem in getting more and better open content collaboration going.

I do not agree, and I think it unwise for people who have not been in direct personal contact with the negotiation process to make rash assumptions about where "the problem" is. --Jimbo

George Herbert

10:15 p.m.

On Nov 21, 2007 12:23 PM, Jimmy Wales <jwales(a)wikia.com> wrote:

...

GerardM wrote:

Hoi, It is nice to see everyone agree that RMS is the problem in getting more

and

better open content collaboration going.

I do not agree, and I think it unwise for people who have not been in direct personal contact with the negotiation process to make rash assumptions about where "the problem" is. --Jimbo

GerardM

10:24 p.m.

Hoi, I do not have ignorance as an excuse. I found it hilarious that in the previous post it was said that "RMS would appear to be the current problem". Having said this, the GFDL for all its good points, was never intended for a project like Wikipedia or Wiktionary. I am convinced that both the EFF and RMS will acknowledge this. It is likely for this reason discussions are going on that will hopefully remedy some if not most of the existing issues. Thanks, GerardM On Nov 21, 2007 11:15 PM, George Herbert <george.herbert(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

On Nov 21, 2007 12:23 PM, Jimmy Wales <jwales(a)wikia.com> wrote:

GerardM wrote: > Hoi, > It is nice to see everyone agree that RMS is the problem in getting

and

better open content collaboration going.

I do not agree, and I think it unwise for people who have not been in direct personal contact with the negotiation process to make rash assumptions about where "the problem" is. --Jimbo

I suspect GerardM probably hadn't clued in yet that there were update and unification talks in progress. It hasn't been loudly talked about until today... -- -george william herbert george.herbert(a)gmail.com _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

6002

days inactive

6003

days old

wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Manage subscription

10 comments

7 participants

tags (0)

participants (7)

Brian McNeil
Casey Brown
geni
George Herbert
GerardM
Jimmy Wales
Nikola Smolenski