[Foundation-l] Design for wikipedia's front page (and corporate)

[Łukasz Garczewski]

Anthony DiPierro napisał(a):
> On 5/18/06, Ben Yates <bluephonic at gmail.com> wrote:
>   
>> There was a proposal to overhaul wikipedia's front-page design, and
>> wikimedia's corporate design, by holding a contest:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Design_overhaul%2C_2006
>>
>> But designers are mostly opposed to contests, and pro designers don't
>> usually compete in them (contests also pose problems for organizations
>> on the recieving end) -- see Talk,
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Design_overhaul%2C_2006
>>
>> So it looks like we have an offer from a visible designer to help us
>> find pro-bono firms and designers who'd be willing to do the site for
>> free (just not on spec).  We should put out a call for portfolios.
>>
>>     
> Is the design going to be GFDL?
>   
After a brief talk with Delphine and some other people (including 
non-wikimedians) during the Wikimedia Polska 2006 meetup my take on this is:

No, the design should NOT be GFDL, CC-whatever or under any other free 
license. The webpage design is an integral part of the sites' visual 
identity, just as much as the project logos (if not more).

Monobook is currently distributed along with every MediaWiki package. 
Anybody can set up a site that looks almost EXACTLY like Wikipedia and 
be on the safe side of the law.

Sure, giving our website design away under a free license is a nice 
thing to do but... Why the hell should we be nice?

We are supposed to gather free knowledge and distribute it under a free 
license. Are we doing it? Yes. Check.
Is the design "free knowledge"? No.

So let's just forget about "the wiki way", "free content" and all that 
other stuff and try to think like an *organization* for a sec. Oh, wait. 
Not just any organization. *The* organization behind one of *the* 20 
most visited sites on the planet.

If this doesn't seem to convince you think about this for a moment: Why 
don't we just release the logos under a free license? When you come to 
an answer simply apply it to the design as well, cause this is the same 
area - visual identity.

(Disclaimer: No, I did not assume Anthony was implying that the design 
should be under GFDL when he asked the question above. I assumed a 
number of people might think that.)

-- 
Cheers,
TOR