Re: [Foundation-l] European Commission Green Paper - Copyright in the Knowledge Economy

2008/11/14 teun spaans [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Agree. And perhaps other organizations working with copy left licenses could be informed? There is nothing in there of any real significance to free licenses. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list

Re: [Foundation-l] Trouble in Ireland

rig it so that to go from one article to the other involves going via a redirect then measure the traffic on that redirect. This was I understand done with respect to some links on the main page at one point. Doesn't require dev involvement. -- geni

Re: [Foundation-l] stumble upon in wikimedia? citation collection, where researchers want to be included in future?

by impact factor is fairly standard. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] 80% of our projects are failing

but it does mean that we have to accept that the educated people from those countries may not want to use them and there is a significant risk of them becoming POV forks. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Re: [Foundation-l] 80% of our projects are failing

among it tourists). But that does not mean we should make any attempt to promote them. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] 80% of our projects are failing

assume they would click the link at the bottom of http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paard_(dier) and get taken to http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Equus_caballus?uselang=nl -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe

Re: [Foundation-l] 80% of our projects are failing

in as keywords for your search engine but by then we are getting a little beyond my knowledge of search design. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Site notice suggestion needed.

searching the entire wiki is probably the most useful method (found the current know issue after 3 attempts). -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Usability: Is our vocabulary SNAFU?

be a good step towards usability thinking before using jargon: is it really necessary here, is it comprehensive to everybody, even if help:glossary mentions it? Ziko Fortunately with the possible exceptions of IP and URL you don't actually need any of those to edit wikipedia. -- geni

Re: [Foundation-l] and what if...

stricter filtering system but is prepared to accept the IWF because it saves money and means that negative PR is not directly pointed at the government. Problem is that I'm not aware of anyone on the IWF committee who can really be termed a free speech advocate. -- geni

Re: [Foundation-l] and what if...

on sight from editing Wikipedia. --Jimbo That would involve blocking a significant chunk of our potential Arab editors. Holocaust denial has fairly popular in certain parts of the world. POV about Israel is a greater problem than normal in our various Islamic dominated languages. -- geni

Re: [Foundation-l] Yale's Access to Knowledge program

qualify. Similar projects would probably be finding out what the various laws relating to government produced documents actually are (we kinda fall apart outside the western world) and finding out how legal say the GPL actually is in the face the more agressive of moral rights clauses. -- geni

Re: [Foundation-l] Britannica became free

), Google who might try using it to populate knol, Yahoo to annoy google. It fits answers.com's profile if they survive that long. Then there are various media companies that might think about it. News Corp for example. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list

Re: [Foundation-l] Jimmy Wales donation appeal

in Wikipedia. With the amount of advertising in schools an unfortunate example I feel. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] New project proposal: Soviet Repressions Memorial

Conquests? Shaka's conquests? They we get the political fun ones. The islamic invasion of india. Arab slave trade. The Muslims killed of in china. Nanking Massacre. Anticommunist purge in Indonesia. The various post independence Pakistan /India/Bangladesh stuff. -- geni

Re: [Foundation-l] Wikistats is back

chapter reps at wikimania . -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Fundraiser update

it so the sensible thing to do would be to remove it or if you have some weird desire to keep it make it a lot smaller. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo

Re: [Foundation-l] Fundraiser update

banners across every page. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Fundraiser update

. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Fundraiser update

2009/1/7 Anders Wegge Keller we...@wegge.dk: geni geni...@gmail.com writes: 2009/1/7 Anders Wegge Keller we...@wegge.dk: Whiners has always been quicker to the keyboard, then those without opinions either way. That's a human trait, i suppose. Failing to take this fact into the equation

Re: [Foundation-l] GFDL QA update and question

2009/1/8 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org: Now read the version in GFDL 1.3. Err you realise that there is at present no GFDL 1.3 only content on wikipedia (there is a very small amount on commons due a misunderstanding)? -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing

Re: [Foundation-l] GFDL QA update and question

may not like this but that would be inconsistent with your claims to prefer the GFDL over CC-BY-SA 3.0. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] GFDL QA update and question

still under the GFDL once the switch is over will be software manuals for which the GFDL is merely a tolerably bad license. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo

Re: [Foundation-l] transparency or translucency?

right to edit any given article than any other but some newbie admins keep trying to mess with this. Beyond that there tend to be Hierarchies out of necessity (from admins to bureaucrats to stewards) But they should impact the basic editing process. -- geni

Re: [Foundation-l] GFDL QA update and question

2009/1/10 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org: Title 17, Section 407. Not actionable unless we receive an actual demand. Which I'm pretty sure we haven't. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https

Re: [Foundation-l] Why is the software out of reach of the community?

is likely to have be widely abused and deployed. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] GFDL QA update and question

unnoticed. Sam, Phoebe and perhaps Geni were all able to accept the spirit of a pleasant diversion, and develop new ideas accordingly. After all, there is more to Wikieschatology than the knowledge itself. Not a diversion as such. Testing licenses is a fairly standard activity. Debian have

Re: [Foundation-l] Language codes to rename

with reading up on the politics and 20th century history of the relevant area. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] GFDL QA update and question

is a fully legally and ethically acceptable way to meet this need. Your conclusion is technically correct but meaningless and your line of reasoning is highly questionable at best. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Re: [Foundation-l] GFDL QA update and question

. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia Attribution and Relicensing

and GPL I wouldn't worry overmuch. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia Attribution and Relicensing

. How would a third party go about using the combined work? Depends on the context. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] RfC: License update proposal

parties. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] RfC: License update proposal

2009/1/21 Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org: 2009/1/20 geni geni...@gmail.com: 4(c)(iii) is irrelevant. The foundation not the licensor and the URL is on top of other attribution and copyright stuff. The only way attribution methods can be controlled through CC-BY-SA-3.0 is through 4(c)(i

Re: [Foundation-l] RfC: License update proposal

that this is not the case for a large number of articles, but it's often the case for the most interesting ones. The proposed attribution language - to state names when there are fewer than six - is precisely written as a compromise. Evidences? -- geni

Re: [Foundation-l] Re-licensing

. The GFDL 1.2 license is so bad that any fork would still be looking to use CC just in a slightly more legal way. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo

Re: [Foundation-l] RfC: License update proposal

2009/1/22 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com: 2009/1/22 geni geni...@gmail.com: 2009/1/22 Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org: That's evidently not true. Many people in this debate have said that giving all names encumbers re-use of the work when such lists get very long, so they are not 'fine

Re: [Foundation-l] Re-licensing

is in compliance with the GFDL. It's resuers who have serious issues. But then I've been through this with you many times and I don't see any reason to think you are any more likely to get it this time around. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list

Re: [Foundation-l] Re-licensing

. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Re-licensing

that it provides a reason. A reason that is logically consistent with observed reality would probably be preferable. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo

Re: [Foundation-l] Re-licensing

2009/1/22 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com: 2009/1/22 geni geni...@gmail.com: So what exactly is the problem with requiring credit reasonable to the medium or means? The fact that we don't seem to be able to agree on what is reasonable. (It would be nice if we could agree it between us

Re: [Foundation-l] Re-licensing

2009/1/22 Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org: 2009/1/22 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com: 2009/1/22 geni geni...@gmail.com: So what exactly is the problem with requiring credit reasonable to the medium or means? The fact that we don't seem to be able to agree on what is reasonable. I

Re: [Foundation-l] RfC: License update proposal

. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Re-licensing

France). -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Re-licensing

and examples, so that there's no ambiguity about our general understanding of what we mean with reasonable applications. What we mean? Err we didn't write the license or the laws that it operates under. What we mean isn't relevant. -- geni ___ foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Wikia leasing office space to WMF

because well we know the CIA is also a large user. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] CIA/NSA development of mediawiki (was: Wikia leasing office space to WMF)

. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Agreement between WMF and O'Reilly Media about Wikipedia: The Missing Manual on Wikipedia?

toi CC-BY-SA-3.0. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Sexual Content on Wikimedia

and quality. I've already created Template:Nobreasts and it would probably useful if someone put together Template:Novulva -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo

Re: [Foundation-l] Sexual Content on Wikimedia

of faces. In addition most parts of the human anatomy don't have the same providence issues. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Sexual Content on Wikimedia

/File:Nopenis.svg style image for Genitalia in general. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Are model releases required for 'Free' content? (was: Sexual Content on Wikimedia)

of requiring uploaders to answer about five questions under penalty of perjury. This would shift liability off of us in the event that someone uses Commons as a battleground and we get sued. We do not have the authority to ask people questions under penalty of perjury. -- geni

Re: [Foundation-l] RfC: License update proposal

and people editing more than once and you are pretty close to what some scientific papers rack up in terms of authors. Most things you could use content for already have customary methods of giving attribution. That isn't going to change. -- geni

Re: [Foundation-l] RfC: License update proposal

are required to credit every author who's work that section is a derivative of. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] RfC: License update proposal

by it's very nature tends to hit these issues before anyone else. Having influence means we in theory have a better chance of getting such issues fixed. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https

Re: [Foundation-l] RfC: License update proposal

you propose. And no moveing wikipedia to Afghanistan is not a valid answer. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] RfC: License update proposal

out such a change in the case of those who have not actively agreed to it. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing interim update

are optimistic. They could just sue the first refuser to think that any statements beyond reasonable to the medium or means had any legal validity. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing interim update

. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] The reality of printing a poster

2009/2/3 Sam Johnston s...@samj.net: I'm not aware of any print-on-demand providers who facilitate the sending of arbitrary documentation with prints so my ability to reuse is still unnecessarily restricted. Sam That must make it rather hard to use the postal service. -- geni

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing interim update

dealing with license incompatibility issues and problems caused by special case clauses and you will soon discover why that suggestion is a really bad idea. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing interim update

derivatives, I would expect such clauses to solve more problems than they create. Actually I would expect people to respond to that by abusing the living daylights out of the copyright notices clause which doesn't greatly improve things. -- geni

Re: [Foundation-l] The reality of printing a poster

of paper would probably meets the requirements. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing interim update

article? But back to your spirit argument. Why would a CC-Wiki that is more practical about attribution be against the spirit of the GFDL? Calling effective removal practical doesn't actually change the situation. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing interim update

flickr image to yahoo). -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Sharing Wikimedia pages on Facebook, etc.

past discussions about this? Is this not a good idea? Halvor (meco) Since we have no wish to advertise such services there is no reason to include such links. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https

Re: [Foundation-l] Steward elections: summary, week one

. Realistically the Iranian government is able to put enough ah pressure on it's citizens to arrange for them to cooperate (this is true for most governments). It is also the case that the Iranian government is more likely to do so in a problematical manner than western governments. -- geni

Re: [Foundation-l] Steward elections: summary, week one

government. In the case of the Iranian one I doubt it would be too worried. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Steward elections: summary, week one

if they try anything. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing interim update

. Not really. Apart from anything else there are no shortage of ways to break the duel licensing if you really want to. In addition any license update will tend in the short term to result in or at least allow a degree of dual licensing. -- geni

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing interim update

to the Napoleonic code rights of man thing. It makes sense to a degree when technical advance is slow and you are worried about authors getting ripped off but yes it has issues when new uses are invented fairly constantly. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list

Re: [Foundation-l] Steward elections: summary, week one

not entirely resistant to the kind of techniques the likes of the Iranian government can deploy. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] status of the licensing update

lays with the board. WMF is a non-membership association. Don't even try to evade that responsibility by delegating it to the community. Accept the responsibility and act accordingly. The board is not at this point that significantly involved. -- geni

Re: [Foundation-l] Simple English Encyclopedia

2009/2/26 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com: Hoi, The language committee is empowered to decide on all new projects. It has been this way since its start. Nothing new here. Thanks, GerardM How do we get rid of you? -- geni

Re: [Foundation-l] Simple English Encyclopedia

for good arguments. I am not the enemy, I am the one that actually talks and engages in the discussion, grin I can be convinced /grin You are doing a poor job at that. Thanks, GerardM You are in a position of power thus I repeat how do we get rid of you? -- geni

Re: [Foundation-l] Simple English Encyclopedia

saved time. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] How will we handle the license migration for images/media?

for the most part. GFDL 1.2 only images are an issue (as are FAL) but they can be dealt with when the time comes. Cleanup can also be addressed at a later. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https

Re: [Foundation-l] Attribution survey, first results

the possible attribution models. CC counsel has commented specifically that attribution-by-URL is a permissible attribution model that is consistent with the language and intent of CC-BY*. What is their line of reasoning on that? -- geni

Re: [Foundation-l] Request for your input: biographies of living people

have been avoided by flagged revisions. Please say this REALLY LOUD to the objectors this time around. - d. Won't work. So of us objectors have overlarge watchlists see so we also know about the cases where long standing issues have been picked up and fixed by IPs. -- geni

Re: [Foundation-l] Attribution survey, first results

2009/3/9 Mike Linksvayer m...@creativecommons.org: On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 12:46 PM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/3/6 Mike Linksvayer m...@creativecommons.org: Yes. Mike (not the CC counsel but just spoke to her) And what was the exact wording of the question asked and what

Re: [Foundation-l] Attribution survey and licensing next steps

are inherently fragile. CC-BY-SA-3.0 clearly states credit must be reasonable to the medium or means. Distinction between media forms are none of the foundation's business since the issue is already taken care of by the license text. -- geni

Re: [Foundation-l] Attribution survey, first results

which operates there) to print Wikipedia editions in English and Swahili without any attribution (even they don't need it). Or for spoken editions for education of blind persons? There is no legal way to do that nor is there any real benefit in doing so. -- geni

Re: [Foundation-l] Attribution survey, first results

kicks it into horrific territory. An answer either way on the pseudo question is meaningless since we don't know what question was being answered. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https

Re: [Foundation-l] Attribution survey, first results

2009/3/10 Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net: Milos Rancic wrote: On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 10:07 PM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/3/9 Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com: So, they don't care about their own copyright law. Common law is very much driven by legal precedent. Looking to see what

Re: [Foundation-l] Proposed revised attribution language

of URL would potentially cause issues if you wished to embed new encyclopedia wiki content in QR code. The phrase otherwise be attributed in the manner specified by the uploader is intensely bad because it allows people to specify attribution via skywriting. -- geni

Re: [Foundation-l] Proposed revised attribution language

2009/3/11 Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org: 2009/3/11 geni geni...@gmail.com: Importing wikipedia content would be an absolute pain Why? The language doesn't require you to include a full list of authors. Only if you want your copy to be a link-creditable copy, you would need to do so

Re: [Foundation-l] Proposed revised attribution language

2009/3/11 Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org: 2009/3/11 geni geni...@gmail.com: Why? The language doesn't require you to include a full list of authors. Only if you want your copy to be a link-creditable copy, you would need to do so. Is provideing credit reasonable to the medium or means

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing update committee open for membership applications

with issues that make the relicensing look trivial for years without knowing or caring about real names. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Proposed revised attribution language

on mugs, travel guides, etc. If the people producing the mugs want that they are free to produce a version of the history on their servers or more legally more solid include a sheet of paper with a complete list of authors with the mug. -- geni

Re: [Foundation-l] Proposed revised attribution language

perform the mug. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Proposed revised attribution language

rather than being a significant part of the free content movement wikipedia ends up as the copyright equivalent of a radioactive mess no sane person would touch. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https

Re: [Foundation-l] Proposed revised attribution language

pushing wouldn't allow for that (the lack of resource type means it is questionable if that is a legit URL) but the need to understand formal technical definitions is just another reason why messing with CC-BY-SA's reasonable to the medium or means is a really bad idea. -- geni

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing transition: opposing points of view

on this list. The rest of the opposition comes from the foundations unlawful and ill thought out proposed TOS. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation

Re: [Foundation-l] Proposed revised attribution language

they lose the case. Under CC-BY-SA it boils down to the reasonable to the medium and means clause which is a rather more defendable position. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing transition: opposing points of view

2009/3/20 Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org: 2009/3/18 geni geni...@gmail.com: 1 person on this list. The rest of the opposition comes from the foundations unlawful and ill thought out proposed TOS. For the record, our legal reasoning for the attribution terms under consideration is as follows

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing transition: opposing points of view

TOS. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing transition: opposing points of view

of the GFDL you are referring to here. I'm fed up with playing guessing games. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing transition: opposing points of view

2009/3/21 Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org: 2009/3/20 geni geni...@gmail.com: Now that argument is flawed on a number of grounds but I think I'll take the easy option. Where is the link of the following pages: Try the edit pages. Doesn't help you. Even those that do mention their equiv

Re: [Foundation-l] Considerations for museums and archives to gain their cooperation

. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Should WMF opt out of Phorm?

the privacy issues would not on their own be a justification. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

  1   2   3   4   >