On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Birgitte SB <birgitte...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- >> From: James Heilman <jmh...@gmail.com> >> To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> Sent: Fri, July 15, 2011 10:39:14 AM >> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] roadmap for WM affiliation ; a name for >>self-identified affiliation >> >> I agree something like "Open Knowledge Project" would be a more suitable >> term. Do they have any decals like those of Health on the Net that people >> could add to their websites? Should there be different degree of >> inclusiveness depending on non commercial or commercial reuse? I see this as >> the first step towards a greater sharing of content between sites. >> > > "Open Knowledge Project" only works for content creators or relatively new > projects that can still restrict their intake of content like Commons has. We > don't want dilute "Open Knowledge" and the issue is existing GLAM > organizations > that want to affiliate with the movement. Some is needed more along the lines > of "Dedicated to Emancipating Culture - we are committed the licensing all > internally owned copyrights under [favorite free license] and to forthrightly > advertising the most accurate copyright information we can on all the content > we > curate." > > Birgitte SB >
Not sure I follow - GLAM institutions are still about disseminating knowledge at low or no cost, so it seems like the name would still apply. Anyway, I think debating the name is a bit cart before horse - the idea is that these organizations seem to share common ideals, and could cooperative in mutually beneficial ways with some sort of formal vehicle. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l