Haha, thank you for the funny form of your message Luca.

Now on topic, I'm not convinced that the current situation resolve the problem, it just pretend that nothing exist out of the simple cases.

For example, currently we can not use data from OSM due to this license restriction. May the per item license attribute is not the best approach, other suggestions are welcome. But at least it's a proposal that would resolve this issue, rather was divest the Wikimedia community from valuable free resource like OSM data for the convenience of Wikidata reusers which are exogenes of the Wikimedia movement. Adding a license attribute is not technically complicated. The only complexity it would make visible is the legal complexity. And providing tool to filter by license or compatible license would be just as easy as adding any other criterion in a request.

Maybe an other approach might be to have a separated Wikibase instance for specific projects (like OSM) or licenses and make them accessible through an other magic word in Mediawiki instances of the foundation. But then it would add technical difficulties in possibility of remix even when distinct licenses are compatibles, although Scribunto modules might help for most trivial cases. However all in all that would be probably a far more complex solution than the previous one.

It's complicated, mathieu

Le 30/11/2017 à 13:07, Luca Martinelli a écrit :

Il 30 nov 2017 13:02, "mathieu stumpf guntz" <psychoslave@culture-libre.org mailto:psychoslave@culture-libre.org> ha scritto:

Also it doesn't completely dismiss the idea of a per item license
tracking system, does it?

In Italy, a country notorious for its simple and easily understandable set of rules, we'd compare such proposal to the institution of the strangely infamous "Office for Complication of Simple Affairs".

That sums up perfectly what I think of this idea, and it's also as diplomatic as I can get on the issue.

L.