[Foundation-l] They do make or break reputations

[Thomas Morton]

>
> Go back to the more transparent rationale that copyright infringement rests
> solely upon the person who uploaded the copyrighted item, not on people who
> merely link to it.  That would allow us to link to YouTube videos for
> example (not host them, just link to them).


> Why read an article on Wikipedia about say.... Shirley Temple, if someone
> else has an identical article AND video streaming as well so you can watch
> one of her movie or a newsreel interview.
>
> Re-hosters will eventually figure this out,  grab all of our content and
> improve upon it.  We should get there before they do.
>
>
Strongly disagree. Wikipedia is built on the principle that freely licensed
content rocks and is the future. Making use of non-freely licensed content
makes that goal hypocritical and awkward.

(by the way; there is not necessairily an issue with linking to Youtube
content - if it is correctly licensed, then it is fine)

Besides; no one has managed to make use of Wikipedia content and build on it
in a way that you suggest - if it were so clear an advantage I am sure
someone would have done it by now!

Wikipedia but with extra non-free images and videos is not a Wikipedia with
significant extra value. A picture may be worth a thousand words, but we
have millions :)

Tom