Hoi,
You forget that as the copyright holder of your picture, you are free to
sell copies of your pictures as well. You are even allowed to provide your
material under a different license. The only thing you are not allowed is to
revoke the license you provided your material to Commons under.
On Thursday 22 January 2009 23:23:17 Andrew Whitworth wrote:
* I make the blanket assumption that everybody here is being perfectly
reasonable.
What an unreasonable assumption! :)
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
2009/1/23 Mike Godwin mnemo...@gmail.com:
Anthony writes:
A legal right is recognized by law. A moral right may not be.
This must be your own idiosyncratic application of the term moral
right. In copyright, moral rights refers to inalienable legal
rights that are recognized in law. If you
On Thursday 22 January 2009 01:11:15 Erik Moeller wrote:
Because I don't think it's good to discuss attribution as an abstract
principle, just as an example, the author attribution for the article
[[France]] is below, excluding IP addresses. According to the view
that attribution needs to be
2009/1/22 Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org:
A vast number of pseudonyms below have no meaning except for
their context in Wikipedia.
Apropos of which, a thought. We have spilled a good bit of ink over
whether or not it is appropriate for the reuser to attribute
Wikipedia users either alone or
2009/1/23 Nikola Smolenski smole...@eunet.yu:
Article length was 82028 bytes, and length of contributors' names is 650 bytes
(or 0.8% of the article's length). If that would be printed in an
encyclopedic format, the article would take some more than ten pages, and the
list of authors would
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 12:22 PM, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk wrote:
2009/1/23 Nikola Smolenski smole...@eunet.yu:
Article length was 82028 bytes, and length of contributors' names is 650
bytes
(or 0.8% of the article's length). If that would be printed in an
encyclopedic format,
2009/1/23 Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.com:
I wonder - would it be possible to get some kind of script set up to
take, say, a thousand of our most popular articles and tell us what
the cite all named authors who make nontrivial contributions result
would be like? This might be a useful bit
Hoi,
No it is not, and this should be obvious because I never mentioned amazon
nor ebay. There is no comparison so do not be daft.
Thanks,
GerardM
2009/1/23 Mark (Markie) newsmar...@googlemail.com
so as long as money goes to a chapter your saying it would be fine to say:
*Put an amazon
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Mark (Markie)
newsmar...@googlemail.comwrote:
so as long as money goes to a chapter your saying it would be fine to say:
*Put an amazon or ebay link on every product related page
*Use referrer ids on wikis to websites that allow it
*and the dreaded
*and the dreaded advertising as long as the money goes to chapter/WMF
You somewhat lost me here... While I do not hope that there will ever
be advertising on a Wikimedia wiki -- where else could money possibly
go than either the chapter or the WMF?
M.
--
Michael Bimmler
mbimm...@gmail.com
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 1:50 PM, Michael Bimmler mbimm...@gmail.com wrote:
*and the dreaded advertising as long as the money goes to chapter/WMF
You somewhat lost me here... While I do not hope that there will ever
be advertising on a Wikimedia wiki -- where else could money
For money, read
Andrew Gray wrote:
2009/1/23 Nikola Smolenski smole...@eunet.yu:
Article length was 82028 bytes, and length of contributors' names is 650
bytes
(or 0.8% of the article's length). If that would be printed in an
encyclopedic format, the article would take some more than ten pages, and
2009/1/23 Marco Chiesa chiesa.ma...@gmail.com:
To be honest, that link is not that different from what
[[Special:Booksources]] does, apart from the fact that for the moment there
is only one company offering the service. Nothing prevents other companies
to offer something comparable and
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 7:13 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/1/23 Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk:
2009/1/23 Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.com:
I wonder - would it be possible to get some kind of script set up to
take, say, a thousand of our most popular
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 5:22 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
cimonav...@gmail.com wrote:
I think it is useful to note that even in countries where
moral rights are inalienable, there is a requirement of
originality and creative effort.
snip
It is not strictly true that all countries require
Hoi,
When we were to move away from a set of URL's from et to ekk, a generic
redirect from et to ekk will suffice because there will be a one on one
relation. The et named articles will never be used for anything else. This
is true because this is how the standard works.
For those wikis where the
Lars Aronsson hett schreven:
I'm not talking about dialects or legal standing. I'm talking
about renaming thousands of URLs, breaking incoming links from
other websites, for no good reason.
After a rename the old link will stay as a redirect and won't change for
a long time (at least
Thomas Dalton writes:
This must be your own idiosyncratic application of the term moral
right. In copyright, moral rights refers to inalienable legal
rights that are recognized in law. If you are in a jurisdiction that
does not recognize moral rights, then you don't have them, by
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 9:08 AM, Robert Rohde raro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 5:22 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
cimonav...@gmail.com wrote:
I think it is useful to note that even in countries where
moral rights are inalienable, there is a requirement of
originality and
2009/1/23 Mike Godwin mnemo...@well.com:
Thomas Dalton writes:
This must be your own idiosyncratic application of the term moral
right. In copyright, moral rights refers to inalienable legal
rights that are recognized in law. If you are in a jurisdiction that
does not recognize moral
Anthony writes:
Anthony writes:
Sure, but I'm not in a jurisdiction that indisputably recognizes the
right
to attribution.
Okay, so why are you invoking rights that you don't have?
Please read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_rights,
2009/1/23 Mike Godwin mgod...@wikimedia.org:
Just because a right isn't recognized, does not mean that I do not
have it.
I have a right to your house. Oh, sure, it's not recognized by
anyone, but I promise I have it!
Like I say, there's a world outside the legal profession. Just because
Thomas Dalton writes:
I understand what the *rhetoric* of moral rights is. But in the
absence of law establishing and protecting moral rights, you don't
have any.
[snip]
There is a world outside the legal profession, Mike. Either learn
that, or restrict the recipients of your emails to
I'm sorry, Thomas, but until people learn to use jurisprudential
concepts such as moral rights properly, I have a moral obligation to
point out where they are used mistakenly. This is not a question of
the world outside the legal profession (and, indeed, if you were a
member of the legal
2009/1/23 Lars Aronsson l...@aronsson.se
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
When we were to move away from a set of URL's from et to ekk, a
generic redirect from et to ekk will suffice because there will
be a one on one relation. The et named articles will never be
used for anything else. This is
Hoi,
Lars, you are talking about Nynorsk and I am talking about Estonian.
Thanks,
GerardM
2009/1/23 Lars Aronsson l...@aronsson.se
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
When we were to move away from a set of URL's from et to ekk, a
generic redirect from et to ekk will suffice because there will
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Mike Godwin mgod...@wikimedia.org wrote:
I'm sorry, Thomas, but until people learn to use jurisprudential
concepts such as moral rights properly, I have a moral obligation to
point out where they are used mistakenly.
You have a moral obligation? I thought
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Mike Godwin mgod...@wikimedia.org wrote:
I'm sorry, Thomas, but until people learn to use jurisprudential
concepts such as moral rights properly, I have a moral obligation to
point out where
Anthony wrote:
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Mike Godwin mgod...@wikimedia.org wrote:
That said, the GFDL requires authors to be listed in the section
entitled
History, and it clearly states that a section Entitled XYZ means
a named
subunit of the Document...
So is current
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 5:54 PM, Andrew Whitworth wknight8...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Mike Godwin mgod...@wikimedia.org wrote:
I'm sorry, Thomas, but until people learn to use jurisprudential
2009/1/23 Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org:
A single URL could point to a list of all contributors for all
articles.
Not under your proposal attribution via reference to page histories
is acceptable if there are more than five authors.
I do agree with you, Mike and others who have pointed out
Andrew Gray wrote:
2009/1/22 Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org:
A vast number of pseudonyms below have no meaning except for
their context in Wikipedia.
Apropos of which, a thought. We have spilled a good bit of ink over
whether or not it is appropriate for the reuser to attribute
Thomas Dalton writes:
I have a right to your house. Oh, sure, it's not recognized by
anyone, but I promise I have it!
Like I say, there's a world outside the legal profession. Just because
something isn't recognised by the law doesn't mean it isn't recognised
by anyone.
So you recognize
Anthony writes:
Maybe you could explain the etymology of that term for us, Mike.
Your last
paragraph seems to imply that you understand it.
Thanks. But surely you don't expect me to tutor you on moral rights
jurisprudence when the materials you need are widely available
elsewhere.
All this comparing, ahem, brain sizes is very interesting - but ultimately
not useful, and detrimental to the ideal tone and purpose of this list.
Nathan
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
Michael Bimmler writes:
Please Stop It.
Sure, Michael.
I confess it sometimes amuses me to argue with trolls, but I have no
interest in continuing to argue publicly when it ceases to amuse
anyone else but me.
My apologies. I'll try to keep things more in hand in the future.
--Mike
I was very surprised to read on the Wikimedia blog a post from Naoko Komura,
the WMF program manager heading up the Wikipedia Usability Initiative,
funded by the Stanton Foundation.
Post:
http://blog.wikimedia.org/2009/01/21/a-note-on-the-wikipedia-usability-initiative/
To quote Komura,
On the
Could we have more detail, please, on the note that Wikia matched the best
offer? Were the other ten higher bidders also given the opportunity to
match the best offer? Why was Wikia chosen on a second and adjusted offer
basis, rather than choosing the good-faith firm that submitted the
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 8:37 PM, Gregory Kohs thekoh...@gmail.com wrote:
I'll also advise the
list moderators that this message is being copied to members of the press.
Thanks for the heads-up, now I'm frightened...
Seriously, I have nothing against you raising these questions, but
sentences
I'm glad someone is concerned about this issue. Wikia has always smacked of
they wouldn't let us show ads on Wikipedia, so here is the for-profit
branch of Wikipedia with ads. There are potential conflicts of interest at
nearly every level of the Wikia/Wikipedia relationship.
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Gregory Kohs thekoh...@gmail.com wrote:
I submitted a comment to the blog, but over seven hours later, it is still
not published, and there is a history of my questions to that blog being
ignored or censored. So, I'm going to ask here, and I'll also advise the
On 1/23/09 11:49 AM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
Could we have more detail, please, on the note that Wikia matched the best
offer? Were the other ten higher bidders also given the opportunity to
match the best offer? Why was Wikia chosen on a second and adjusted offer
basis, rather than choosing
The Foundation was searching for rooms because the current rooms are
already quite crowded (everyone who had visited the office can confirm
this) and because we will start the usability project we are going to
hire three more developers.
Thus the Foundation has either to lease offices in the
(We'd much rather keep them *in* our main office, but we're
simply out of room!)
I'm curious, how did that happen exactly? You didn't get the office
that long ago and most of the recent hires have been planned a fair
amount of time in advance. Why did you get a bigger office to start
with?
Out of curiosity, will the cost of leasing the space be deducted from the
usability grant funds?
Nathan
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Wikia has been doing intensive work on the usability front and making
the code available to public, so I look forward to collaborating with
the Wikia technical and product teams to exchange ideas and learn from
their work.
There is a certain amount of logic in working with one of the biggest
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 3:31 PM, Gregory Kohs thekoh...@gmail.com wrote:
It would appear that nobody is concerned about giving the landlord a
leg up on ITS for-profit competitors by supplying them in particular
with a ready feed of intellectual capital in the form of the friendly
Nathan wrote:
Out of curiosity, will the cost of leasing the space be deducted from the
usability grant funds?
Normal overhead costs were budgeted into the grant from the beginning.
That's one of the reasons we're not using it to hire 30 developers at
$30,000 a year, but setting more
The issue is pretty plain and simple:
* Our Office Manager explored several options, including Wikia;
* We've suggested to Wikia a fair market rate based on the average of
the other options we obtained;
* After some negotiation, Wikia accepted. Weighing other pros and cons
of the space against
Erik Moeller wrote:
[snip]
* We've suggested to Wikia a fair market rate based on the average of
the other options we obtained;
* After some negotiation, Wikia accepted. Weighing other pros and cons
of the space against other options, we decided to go with Wikia;
To clarify, did Wikia match
2009/1/23 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com:
I'm curious, how did that happen exactly? You didn't get the office
that long ago and most of the recent hires have been planned a fair
amount of time in advance.
Growth can be unpredictable for a number of reasons - changing
assumptions about
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 3:31 PM, Gregory Kohs thekoh...@gmail.com wrote:
It would appear that nobody is concerned about giving the landlord a
leg up on ITS for-profit competitors by supplying them in particular
with a ready feed of intellectual capital in the form of the friendly
2009/1/23 Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org:
* We've suggested to Wikia a fair market rate based on the average of
the other options we obtained;
Average, or cheapest? If it really was average, then you're going to
have need to justify precisely how the added bonuses from Wikia are
worth whatever
2009/1/23 David Levy lifeisunf...@gmail.com:
Erik Moeller wrote:
[snip]
* We've suggested to Wikia a fair market rate based on the average of
the other options we obtained;
* After some negotiation, Wikia accepted. Weighing other pros and cons
of the space against other options, we decided
2009/1/23 Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org:
2009/1/23 David Levy lifeisunf...@gmail.com:
Erik Moeller wrote:
[snip]
* We've suggested to Wikia a fair market rate based on the average of
the other options we obtained;
* After some negotiation, Wikia accepted. Weighing other pros and cons
of
Erik Moeller wrote:
I know that Wikia/WMF related stuff is pretty exciting, but really, we
have work to do. We're not going to not make a decision that is right
just because it creates fodder for trolling. (And I hope that if this
turns into a troll-fest, the list moderators will take
Delirium delir...@hackish.org writes:
There's a reason organizations that depend on public goodwill try to
avoid even the appearance of impropriety in this sort of respect,
and auditors usually suggest avoiding those sorts of entanglements.
Could you please keep the amount of crackpotish
George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 1:42 PM, Anders Wegge Keller we...@wegge.dk wrote:
Could you please keep the amount of crackpotish kookery at a minimum
at this list?
I'm somewhat confused - Delirium's comment here is reasonable,
accurate, and a
Anders Wegge Keller wrote:
Delirium delir...@hackish.org writes:
There's a reason organizations that depend on public goodwill try to
avoid even the appearance of impropriety in this sort of respect,
and auditors usually suggest avoiding those sorts of entanglements.
Could you please
2009/1/23 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com:
Hoi,
Having an office close to the main office, having an environment that is
shared with colleagues who way are sharing their impressive usability
improvements are tangible benefits.
I agree, the issue is with how much you value them. They
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 1:49 PM, Anders Wegge Keller we...@wegge.dk wrote:
George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 1:42 PM, Anders Wegge Keller we...@wegge.dk
wrote:
Could you please keep the amount of crackpotish kookery at a minimum
at this list?
Delirium delir...@hackish.org writes:
Anders Wegge Keller wrote:
Could you please keep the amount of crackpotish kookery at a minimum
at this list?
In what respect is it crackpottish or kookery to suggest that
even appearance of impropriety, even where none exists, is damaging
to
Anders Wegge Keller wrote:
Delirium delir...@hackish.org writes:
Anders Wegge Keller wrote:
Could you please keep the amount of crackpotish kookery at a minimum
at this list
In what respect is it crackpottish or kookery to suggest that
even appearance of impropriety, even where none
I find it interesting that critics of the Foundation are necessarily either
a troll, crackpot or kook, and yet, by my estimation, each one of these
critics has been around longer than the Foundation and wishes to make sure
that it develops in a manner consistent with the much older philosophy
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 11:01 PM, Anders Wegge Keller we...@wegge.dk wrote:
George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 1:49 PM, Anders Wegge Keller we...@wegge.dk wrote:
Not to me, and it just happened to be the one that tripped my trigger
setting.
I
2009/1/23 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com:
. Did you consider the PR cost when weighing it all up?
Of course. It's a normal transaction and any noise about it is likely
going to be ephemeral. We will continue to calmly and sensibly explain
it to reasonable people, and that's all there is to
Delirium wrote:
Most people, however, neither know the board nor have any particularly
great knowledge of Wikimedia's internals. Were it any other
organization, as in my Sierra Club example, I wouldn't believe the
explanation, so I wouldn't blame non-Wikimedians who read about this in
the
2009/1/23 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com:
Sounds good. Could you calmly and sensibly explain it to me, then? How
did you come to decide that the addition benefits of working in
Wikia's offices were worth the extra money? (I'm willing to accept
that there could be a good explanation, I'd
2009/1/23 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
The natural state of these discussions is that there are always people
pissing in the wind. That spoils things somewhat.
Hear hear, true words in a typical Dutch wording. :-)
I am amazed about the transparency and openess the staff members
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 20:53, Brian brian.min...@colorado.edu wrote:
I'm glad someone is concerned about this issue. Wikia has always smacked of
they wouldn't let us show ads on Wikipedia, so here is the for-profit
branch of Wikipedia with ads. There are potential conflicts of interest at
2009/1/23 Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org:
2009/1/23 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com:
Sounds good. Could you calmly and sensibly explain it to me, then? How
did you come to decide that the addition benefits of working in
Wikia's offices were worth the extra money? (I'm willing to accept
2009/1/23 George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com:
This is a discussion about copyright law and licenses under / related to it,
is it not? And not philosophy writ large?
It was, I think we drifted a little off-topic.
___
foundation-l mailing list
George Herbert writes:
There was a slight danger in the Foundation chosing to hire Mike as
counsel,
that he has a long-established tendency to poke fun at people ( cf.
Godwin's
Law, and more long painful Usenet discussions from 20 plus years ago
than I
care to remember at the
2009/1/23 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com:
2009/1/24 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 6:13 PM, Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.comwrote:
My reply isn't specific to what Thomas wrote; this is a general
comment on this thread. I've been reading it with a lot of interest,
2009/1/24 Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org:
I would also say that I am happy we're talking about this, and I hope
the people asking questions are finding the answers reasonably
reassuring :-)
Depends. The wikia is a large user therefor we should work with them
argument is somewhat worrying
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 5:13 PM, George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.comwrote:
Used relative to copyright law, the term unambiguously means what Mike is
saying, the rights that Europe (and others) have assigned to actual authors
distinct from copyright owners etc.
If you look at the context
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 9:47 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/1/24 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 6:13 PM, Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.com
wrote:
Wikia, as was said elsewhere, is one of the
biggest Mediawiki users out there and therefore has,
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 7:07 PM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/1/24 Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org:
I would also say that I am happy we're talking about this, and I hope
the people asking questions are finding the answers reasonably
reassuring :-)
Depends. The wikia is a large
Mr Kohs;
Some of your points have merit as there are many areas in which we can and
should improve. However, I must respectfully note that your comments here serve
only to divide a already fractured community even further. As a Californian, I
disagree with your assertions of nepotism and
Wikia is a way to utilize MediaWiki for profit. The United States is a
capitalist society, and this should be encouraged. Also Wikia hosts many
fansites and I don't hear them complaining about people playing ball.
From: Brian brian.min...@colorado.edu
To:
Mr Kohs;
You are beating on a dead horse. Mr. Vibber has brought forth a list of
perfectly valid reasons why this space was taken. LET ME REITERATE THE COST OF
REWIRING/RECONFIGURING SPACE IN CALIFORNIA. Why should a taco stand use a dry
cleaning shop when it can get another taco shop?
Mr. Levy;
I respectfully believe that you are asking the wrong question. Rent is only a
small part of cost. The whole cost should have been the arbiter in this matter,
and I suspect it was from the posts by personnel.
From: David Levy lifeisunf...@gmail.com
Beating on a dead horse is not a valid point.
From: George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 1:47:54 PM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikia leasing office space to
On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 12:23 AM, Geoffrey Plourde geo.p...@yahoo.comwrote:
Its the same software for both parties, and its open source. Please just
drop it.
If you would please be so kind as to summarize your viewpoints in
fewer messages. The past 10 to this thread have all been by you.
85 matches
Mail list logo
