[Foundation-l] Rethinking brands

[David Gerard]

On 11/05/07, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <cimonavaro at gmail.com> wrote:

> I think it is mistaken to think that an encyclopaedia that did not go
> for GFDL could not survive... Look at the Stanford Encyclopaedia of
> Philosophy. To the content producers the big thing with wikipedia is
> that we are open access, not that we are GFDL. Well guess what,
> Stanford is open access but completely copyright, not left.


This is one reason I want to talk up free content as an important part
of what we are.


> > Has anyone approached Scholarpedia about free content licensing, by
> > the way? They wouldn't need to change a single thing about the
> > Scholarpedia model - just require new works to be free content.


Erik would be the person for this, but he may be just a touch busy ...
is there anyone who routinely works on this sort of thing? It's of
almost-direct interest to WMF's interests to make free content
*normal*.


- d.