[Foundation-l] content ownership in different projects

Samuel Klein meta.sj at gmail.com
Tue Jun 21 19:52:12 UTC 2011

On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 6:26 AM, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 17 June 2011 16:08, Marco Chiesa <chiesa.marco at gmail.com> wrote:
>> To be honest, when you release your work under cc-by-sa you grant a
>> third party the right to reuse a (small or large) part of your work to
>> make a derivative work. The license in itself is not what determines
>> that the live version of a Wikipedia article is the last one, this
>> happens because of Wikipedia policies. And of course, your (old)
>> version is not deleted from the article history apart from a few
>> cases. The point is: Wikipedia is a collaborative encyclopedia, if
>> people don't accept this they can always publish somewhere else.
> Indeed. "No ownership of articles" does not follow from the licence -
> it's just the way things happen to be done on Wikipedia.

I believe this was Amir's original point - he was asking for examples
from other projects where different social norms had had different
(better?) results.

> For comparison, I understand that Wikibooks are considered somewhat
> "owned" by the person starting the book.

A fair comparision, though as with Wikipedia editions I think this
varies by language.


More information about the foundation-l mailing list