[Foundation-l] Copies of Wikipedia's articles found on Knol

[mboverload]

Knol is basically a way for people to cut and paste and make ad money with
no effort.

I don't know of any good solutions, or if we even need any solutions.  If we
start harping on Knol then people will think we are "the man" and too
uptight.  "Knowledge should be free, right?"

This is a battle that I'm not sure anyone could, or should win.


On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 3:18 PM, Philippe Beaudette <
philippebeaudette at gmail.com> wrote:

> That was smart.  Thanks. :-)
>
> _____________________
> Philippe Beaudette
> Tulsa, OK
> philippebeaudette at gmail.com
>
>
>
>
> On Jul 28, 2008, at 3:49 PM, Nathan wrote:
>
> > Oh, I did awhile ago. It doesn't look totally cut and dry, but until
> > it gets
> > a little clearer for me they are down.
> >
> > Nathan
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Philippe Beaudette <
> > philippebeaudette at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Yeah, to be blunt... Nathan, you're in over your head on this one.
> >> I'd suggest you pull them down until these issues are worked out.
> >>
> >> _____________________
> >> Philippe Beaudette
> >> Tulsa, OK
> >> philippebeaudette at gmail.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Jul 28, 2008, at 1:20 PM, effe iets anders wrote:
> >>
> >>> All Rights reserved is more restrictive then the GFDL and therefore
> >>> not allowed to relisence with if I am informed correctly. Unless
> >>> Knol
> >>> allowed GFDL as license option, or CC-BY-SA-3.0 *and* GFDL/CC-BY-SA
> >>> get compatible (not yet the case) you will not be allowed to upload
> >>> Wikipedia content to Knol unless you are the sole author (such as I
> >>> did with Ter Heijde I think)
> >>>
> >>> Best regards,
> >>>
> >>> Lodewijk
> >>>
> >>> 2008/7/28 Nathan <nawrich at gmail.com>:
> >>>> Right, I'm not by any means an expert on the licenses (everytime I
> >>>> read
> >>>> about them, I look them up again to remind myself what the
> >>>> differences are)
> >>>> and it did look to me like the issue was one of relicensing.
> >>>>
> >>>> At any rate, they are all licensed appropriately now. Thank you to
> >>>> whoever
> >>>> made the suggestion of posting the notice and changing the
> >>>> publication
> >>>> option to "All rights reserved."
> >>>>
> >>>> Nathan
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> foundation-l mailing list
> >>>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> >>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/
> >>>> foundation-l
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> foundation-l mailing list
> >>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> >>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> foundation-l mailing list
> >> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/
> >> foundation-l
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>