He's mistaken. There is no mechanism in place for generating income from the domains qrpedia.org and qrwp.org. Commentators also need to differentiate between the site (which physically hosts the servers) and the domain names. WMUK's interest in QRpedia is in finding ways to ensure that the service provided remains secure and free in perpetuity.

--
Doug


On 17 September 2012 23:05, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 8:39 PM, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 8:37 PM, Chris Keating <chriskeatingwiki@gmail.com> wrote:

I understand the QRpedia software is freely reusable under the MIT License, today. In other words – people in Brazil or India are able to use the QRpedia technology too, aren't they? And they will always be able to use it whenever they want, without ever having to ask the current rights holders or Wikimedia UK for permission first, correct?

Correct. 

To further clarify - we are not really talking about intellectual property rights. We are talking about the domains currently used to provide the qrpedia service, which are qrpedia.org and qrwp.org.


Thanks Chris. That makes more sense. :)


Actually, one more question. Chris Owen says on the DYK talk page 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#Potential_abuse_of_DYK

that Roger is apparently being paid for the use of these domains, which I understand link the users of mobile devices to Wikipedia content. Does that mean that, once the transfer of these sites to Wikimedia UK is complete, Wikimedia UK will be charging customers of these sites to generate revenue? Or will QRpedia thereafter be a free encyclopedia?

Or is Chris Owen altogether mistaken about QRpedia being a paid service?

Andreas

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org