On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 08:46:23 -0400 Stirling Newberry
At which point the article is no longer open source,
because someone else
owns part of the source that does not travel with the article, and the
owner of the images can precent wikimedia from selling the exact product,
or at any future time decide to unilaterally alter the license and require
Proprietary source is a seductive trap, and proprietary vendors will give
away for free for a while, and then, once you are locked in - because the
open source solutions are killed off - raise prices to monopoly levels.
Jimbo is absolutely on the money: don't take the proprietary crack, stay
clean and sober on this one.
I don't see the problem here. Either they can alter the license, and then
they can do so whether or not they allow certain things, so we should not
take ANYTHING from others, or they cannot change the license and then, well,
they cannot. I don't see the problem. But if we really go this way, then
please START by getting rid of all 'fair use' pictures and all 'allowed for
Wikipedia use' pictures. Those have MUCH stricter restrictions on them than
"not allowed to sell the picture stand-alone." For that matter, let's get
rid of GNU/FDL pictures too, we may not sell those alone either. We may only
sell them with the whole license attached...