[Foundation-l] Copyrighted maps and Derived works

[Samuel Klein]

On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 7:36 AM, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2 April 2010 08:15, Samuel Klein <meta.sj at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Someone on the OSM threads commented that they make an effort to be
>> 'whiter than white' when it comes to observing all possible legal
>> nuances.  And it occurs to me that OSM at its heart is much more
>> deeply concerned with reuse and guaranteeing zero hassles for reusers
>> than Wikimedia currently is.
>
> It varies. Geographical data is a particularly weak area for wikipedia.

True.  And having cc-sa text makes reuse in books much easier tha nit
was under gfdl.  But we aren't working in a space where we have
competitors waiting to pounce on any opportunity to make our lives
more difficult, which makes a difference in priorities.


>> [can you name a significant published
>> work that draws heavily from a Wikimedia project, other than those
>> produced by Wikipedians that consist entirely of an edited selection
>> of Wikipedia articles?]
>
> Encyclopedia Britannica uses a lot of commons images these days.

... and as of last summer they claimed the money they spend to
validate the 'freeness' of those images is similar to what they would
normally pay a stock company, but decreasing over time.  I'm not sure
if the decrease is them getting used to a different process or Commons
getting better about explicit verification of claimed licenses.

SJ