[Foundation-l] Clearing up Wikimedia's media licensing policies (some important points)

[Delphine Ménard]

On 2/8/07, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:

> Fair use is somewhat different in that many third party uses,
> especially educational ones, will be permissible as well. Beyond that,
> fair use and similar exemptions are a good way to describe a set of
> content which we, pragmatically, will accept, but which we can
> communicate clearly as being philosophically incompatible with our
> core mission. The important point is that there is a clear division
> into two spheres:
>  * fair use / fair dealing and similar exemptions
>  * free content

As much as I condemn the whole revolutionary clash. As much as I agree
with the strong statement let's ban ND, NC and "with permission", as
much as I agree with the fact that "fair use" is "more permissive"
than those non free licenses or those non-licenses, I cannot help but
feel sorry that two members of the board have expressed the
differences in these terms.

As we say in French, I would appreciate if we called a cat a cat. When
you say "we will communicate clearly as being incompatible with our
core mission" I find this utterly contradictory.

I'm sorry. Clearly communicating for me, means expressing a clear YES
or a clear NO. And if we are to take our core mission as witness, then
either we are true to it, or we are not. And if we are not, because to
some extent, for the time being, we cannot, fine. Let's say it.  If
the board decision is that we're keeping the status-quo as far as fair
use is concerned, this is totally fine by me. Your decision, I will
defer to it.

But let's face it, fair use is unfree, a little less than another
maybe. The only difference is that the en community and also the WMF
has decided to accept it, out of, as Erik points out, pragmatism.
This, for me would be the right phrasing. And the fair one, to
everyone.

Do not forget that there are probably 100 wikipedias with enough
articles to be of note, and that probably one and only one of them is
going to invoke fair use. Granted, it's the biggest one. But that does
not make it the "right" one. So tell me we're accepting fair use
because the English community is divided, tell me it's because the
Foundation is in the US and it makes sense there. Tell me it's a
political move.

Tell me anything but don't tell me that fair-use can be used for this
that and the rest and that it's not so bad, after all. (at least, this
is what I repreatedly hear, this manichean speech that says ND/NC and
permission are EVIL, fair use is LESS EVIL). Don't even hint at it. I
said it earlier, I believe fair-use is evil. ;-) And it seems I am not
the only one.

If anything, I think it very sad that the biggest Wikipedia is
condemning itself to be distributed "as such" only in countries where
the fair use doctrine exists, and bars itself from being distributed
in the rest of the world.

I have, however, faith that the other wikipedias will show the light.
Slowly, but surely...


Cheers,

Delphine

-- 
~notafish
NB. This address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails sent to
this address will probably get lost.