On Nov 29, 2005, at 2:54 PM, Michael H. Georg wrote: > I'll stand by my characterization of an audio wiki as an oxy-moron. >
Fair enough. Maybe the term "wiki" isn't appropriate. What term do you think would be more accurate to describe a site with the following properties: - anyone can upload an audio file to the site - anyone can download the audio - anyone can make a derived work from the audio - anyone can upload a modified version - a history of uploads is kept - anyone can revert the current version to a previous version Perhaps the term "wiki with audio"? > Robert, I checked out your audio entries for /Producing Open Source > Software. /Sounds like a lot of hard work, and sounds good, > although I had trouble getting the volume up enough to clearly hear > it. Volume problem could be this old laptop. > Yes, the audio volume is a bit low and there's a fair amount of background noise. My guess is that I don't quite have the right recording setup. It's also likely that I'm not using Audacity correctly. If anyone has some tips or suggestions, I'm all ears. > Forgive me, but I must point out; that is a copyrighted article and > not particularly suitable for editing, although the copyright is a > very liberal one. > If you mean the POSS book, here's the copyright notice: Copyright (c) 2005 Karl Fogel, under a CreativeCommons Attribution- ShareAlike license as well as this link: http://producingoss.com/html-chunk/copyright.html which refers to the Creative Commons: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/1.0/ > If the article is edited via the wiki, is the editor required to > follow this item in the copyright? > > Share Alike: If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you > may distribute the resulting work only under a license > identical to this one. > Yes, that's part of the license, which also includes these items: You are free: * to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work * to make derivative works * to make commercial use of the work The way I read the license anyone can make an audio recording (a derivative work) and distribute it in any way they want. But I could be wrong. Do you feel that the license is being violated somehow? If so, please let me know so that I can fix that. > I'm at work,running out of lunch time, and not sure I've made a > clear point here. > I think you have. But we can also discuss this more at the meeting on Saturday. Regards, - Robert http://www.cwelug.org/downloads Help others get OpenSource software. Distribute FLOSS for Windows, Linux, *BSD, and MacOS X with BitTorrent _______________________________________________ CWE-LUG mailing list [email protected] http://www.cwelug.org/ http://www.cwelug.org/archives/ http://www.cwelug.org/mailinglist/
