Lars Aronsson wrote:
Anthere wrote:
Ah, and who do you think would appoint a "site owner" ??? Jimbo ?
Yes, of course. He owns the system, the name, and the machines. He is very generous and liberal, but he is the owner. It is not self-evident that you can reuse the name "Wikipedia", since that would be regulated by U.S. trademark law. Jimmy might decide to form a non-profit organization under U.S. law or perhaps Swiss law (like the U.N.?).
I'm not unhappy with this. I fully trust Jimmy.
This all depends on what importance, rights and responsibilities you attach to the concept of ownership. There are intangible aspects of the project which are collectively owned. In the short run I don't see ownership as a problem, and I'm not in a hurry to see a debate on the fine points of trademark law.
I'm willing to accept the presumption that Jimmy is acting in good faith, and that he will give up personal ownership if he is confident about where the project will head afterwards. There's no need to approach the subject with expectations of legal controversy.
Some of us support it is also a dictionary... :-)
If the trademark Wikipedia has some meaning (NPOV, etc.), perhaps defined by some charter, that meaning should be the same for all languages. A year ago, Larry Sanger was very clear on the point that "Wikipedia is not a dictionary". So if the French Wikipedia is becoming a dictionary, somebody is breaking this rule. Either the French Wikipedia should straight up, or the rule should be revised. Since it is the trademark owner's (Jimmy's) interest to make sure the trademark keeps its meaning, he should appoint ambassadors who can help him maintain his policy in the various languages.
If the French Wikipedia feels that it is appropriate to include being a dictionary that's their business. I don't see the need for them to be bound by one of Larry's rules from a year ago when thay had no opportunity to participate in its development. Demanding that they "straighten up" would be unnecessarily dictatorial. Trademarks are irrelevant to this point. Appointing ambasadors to maintain policy would symbolize everything that most of us love to hate about the United States; it could inspire the Spanish "Eciclopedia Libre" to become multilingual.
This is why I think that an appointed ambassador or governor is needed, who knows the language and has the authority (from Jimmy) to tell people what the policy is, that they can join this list if they want to discuss the policy, and if they cannot accept this policy, then they must leave and start their own project.
Frankly, (and speaking as an unrepentant leftist) from what I've seen of Jimmy's posts on this list, he has not exhibited symptoms of being such an autocrat.
Eclecticology