On 5 February 2010 02:57, James Alexander jamesofur@gmail.com wrote:
Well I would think that we would be able to have them "opt-in" to the free licence in the same way that wikimedia does (you agree to it when you signup/submit something). We would just be giving them the opportunity to opt-out of that and still use the service. I would tend to agree with having an opt-out function, mostly for legitimate concerns like Pathoschilds.
You hint upon another obvious counter-argument: namely that the Wikimedia Projects demand CC licensing on text and they get on well. Obviously the situation isn't the same here - namely that CC licensing is a necessity for the goal of the project.
I would submit that F/OS licensing is not a *necessity* for tools. It's very nice though, and I agree with the obvious benefits.
Aryeh, earlier: "if you want to write closed-source software related to Wikimedia, you can do it on your own dime and not using Wikimedia-DE's hardware, software, or administration budget"
The cost of administrating an opt-out programme and enforcing free/open-source rules would be rather onerous on an administration budget, I feel.
Again, I think that education as to the benefits of open sourcing code to precipitate a complete change in attitude in those who habitually go closed-source is far better than forcing it upon them.
Thanks Martin