[Foundation-l] We should permit Flash video playback

[Ilya Haykinson]

On 7/19/07, Stephen Bain <stephen.bain at gmail.com> wrote:
> Don't abbreviate it to "educational content" like that. It's
> "educational content under a free license or in the public domain". If
> you're going to quote the mission statement to support your argument,
> quote it accurately.

I understand that some people have the attitude of Wikimedia being in
the business of promoting free codecs and unencumbered file types.
Our mission doesn't say that, it talks about content.

I think that we need to follow our mission first, and ensure that we
provide educational content under a free license.  That means
unencumbered by patents or restrictions.

The mission doesn't say anything about exclusivity.  It doesn't say
"educational content ONLY under a free license".  I see no reason for
us not to accept MP3 files and transcode them, providing the OGG and
the MP3 and whatever other formats strike our fancy.  I see no reason
for us to prohibit Flash, when the same video can also be available in
Theora or whatever the free codec of the day is relatively popular.
Why punish our users in the name of the exclusively-open?

Freedom of content means two things to me: 1) accessibility of
content, and 2) liberty of content.  We are trying to ensure 2) but
keep coupling it with 1).  I think that this is not completely
necessary, and our users would find our content much more accessible
if we provided some access in other, popular formats, whenever it's
helpful to our readers.

-ilya haykinson