The idea that NC is "open and free" is growing like a cancer in Brazil and Portugal. I've been noticing that for some time already, and I do believe we as a Movement should have some sort of plan or strategy to fight that - and never indulge in accepting NC as a valid license for the Wikimedia projects, as IMO it really hinders our mission of a free and open project.
Paulo
Yury Bulka setthemfree@privacyrequired.com escreveu no dia segunda, 20/05/2019 à(s) 07:28:
From: Mister Thrapostibongles thrapostibongles@gmail.com
I'm not quite sure what you mean here. Firstly, this isn't the right
venue
for a discussion of the general principle of non-commercial licensing, especially as the Foundation has decided on the use of licences that
permit
commercial reuse.
In my opition it's not a terribly offtopic subject for this list, but let my clarify that my intent is not to revisit the current licensing policy of Wikimedia projects.
I just thought that this could be useful to someone advocating for the use of fully libre licenses (the ones without any non-commercial clauses) outside Wikimedia projects, as it shows how the non-commercial clause could be interpreted by some actors that have resources and rights to go to court over your use of the work.
And secondly, there's nothing to prevent a rights owner from granting a full/libre licence if they want to for the works they
own:
so why would one need to advocate for it, here or anywhere else?
Because many people think that non-commercial is good enough, for instance MPs establishing laws touching Freedom of Panorama.
Best, Yury.
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe