[Foundation-l] RfC: Draft licensing policy resolution

[effe iets anders]

Do the communities have to ask permission to implement an EDP in their
project? Or is that only an advice?

Will the general council also advice on the part of EDP on local law, or
only for the "US-part" ?

Does the EDP have to be fine with GFDL too?

Will the EDP be a temporary solution, or a definitive one?

Lodewijk

2007/2/20, Erik Moeller <erik op wikimedia.org>:
>
> In follow-up to previous discussion, here's the current draft of the
> resolution for an official WMF licensing policy. We would appreciate
> comments and suggestions.
>
> This is a DRAFT and not an invitation for any unusual deletion
> actions, nor an official announcement of any kind. :-)
>
> ==Applicable definitions==
> ; Project
> : the combination of a Wikimedia Foundation project, such as Wikipedia
> or Wikisource, and a language.
> ; Free License
> : a license which meets the terms of the ''Definition of Free Cultural
> Works'' specific to licenses, as can be found at
> http://freedomdefined.org/Definition version 1.0.
> ; Exemption Doctrine Policy (EDP)
> : a project-specific policy that, in accordance with United States law
> and the law of countries where the project content is predominantly
> accessed (if any), recognizes the limitations of copyright law
> (including case law) as applicable to the project, and permits the
> upload of copyrighted materials that can be legally used in the
> context of the project. Examples include:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fair_use and
> http://pl.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Dozwolony_u%C5%BCytek
>
> ==Resolution==
>
> Whereas the mission of the Wikimedia Foundation is to "empower and
> engage people around the world to collect and develop educational
> content under a ''free license'',"
> # All projects are expected to host only content which is under a Free
> License, or which is otherwise free as recognized by the Definition
> referenced above.
> # In addition, with the exception of Wikimedia Commons, each project
> community may develop and adopt an EDP. Non-free content used under an
> EDP must be identified in a machine-readable format so that it can be
> easily identified by users of the site as well as re-users.
> # Such EDPs must be minimal. Whenever possible, content used under an
> EDP should be replaced with a freely licensed work if it carries
> equivalent information content. Media used under EDPs are subject to
> deletion if there is rough consensus that they lack an applicable
> rationale. They must be used only in the context of other freely
> licensed content, and may not be arranged in galleries.
> # For the projects which currently have an EDP in place, the following
> action shall be taken:
> #* As of February XX, 2007, all new media uploaded under unacceptable
> licenses (as defined above) and lacking an exemption rationale should
> be deleted, and existing media under such licenses should go through a
> discussion process where it is determined whether such a rationale
> exists; if not, they should be deleted as well.
> # For the projects which currently do not have an EDP in place, the
> following action shall be taken:
> #* As of February XX, 2007, any newly uploaded files under an
> unacceptable license shall be deleted.
> #* The Foundation resolves to assist project communities in need of an
> EDP in the process of developing it. The General Counsel is directed
> to coordinate this process.
> #* By February XX, 2008, all existing files under an unacceptable
> license must either be used under an EDP, or shall be deleted.
>
>
> --
> Peace & Love,
> Erik
>
> DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of
> the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.
>
> "An old, rigid civilization is reluctantly dying. Something new, open,
> free and exciting is waking up." -- Ming the Mechanic
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l op lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>