[Licom-l] Opt-out?

[Ryan Kaldari]

Apparently a lot of people don't even believe that the migration is
supposed to apply to images (even though that was explained on the Q&A
page). So I anticipate we are going to face a lot of opposition and
foot-dragging (multiplied by 300 projects). Any official
statements/recommendations that the Foundation could make regarding
license migration for media would surely help.

Ryan Kaldari

On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Robert Rohde <rarohde at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 12:50 PM, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:
>> 2009/5/26 Robert Rohde <rarohde at gmail.com>:
>>> One of the unresolved issues in my estimation is how to react to
>>> people who say: "Relicensing?  Not my work, no way, no how!".
>>
>> Yes: I don't think we can give any prescriptive answer, but for this
>> and for some other licensing-related practical questions (including
>> the "external content attribution" question), I think we should start
>> coming up with a list of recommendations for Wikimedia communities.
>> Communities would be free to implement these as they see fit.
>>
>> An example recommendation here could be to extend the courtesy of
>> removal where doing so is reasonably possible without major
>> disruption.
>
> On this issue the WMF would be within their rights to be prescriptive.
>  (Whether they want to be is a separate question.)  The relicensing
> provisions require an overt act by the Foundation, so the WMF could
> choose to exclude certain works.
>
> For example, the WMF could say:"Relicensing applies to all media files
> validly tagged as GFDL 1.2 or later versions as of 12:01 AM on June
> 15th, 2009".  With the stipulation that anyone who doesn't want to
> participate has between now and June 15th to change a "1.2 or later
> versions" tag on their own work to a "1.2-only" tag.  That has the
> advantage of being final and legally binding.
>
> The alternative, to let communities set their own rules, could also
> work though I think it is more likely to drag the process out.  It
> also risks the creation of fragmentary rules (what if Commons has
> different rules than EN?) and leading to fights where someone other
> than the author reuploads a work claiming they are just exercising
> their rights, etc.
>
> -Robert Rohde
>
> _______________________________________________
> Licom-l mailing list
> Licom-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/licom-l
>