Re: [Wikimedia-l] Non-free images in collaborations

2014-03-19 Thread Yana Welinder
Hi all, We've started changing the copyright status for the Wikibooks logo on Commons to CC BY-SA 3.0: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikibooks-logo-en-noslogan.svg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikibooks-logo.svg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikibooks-logo-en.svg

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Non-free images in collaborations

2014-03-19 Thread Michael Peel
Hi Yana, That's a good change - thanks for making it. :-) Out of curiosity, is there a reason why you're using v3 rather than v4 of the license? Thanks, Mike On 19 Mar 2014, at 19:46, Yana Welinder ywelin...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi all, We've started changing the copyright status for the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Non-free images in collaborations

2014-03-19 Thread Tomasz W. Kozlowski
Yana Welinder wrote: We've started changing the copyright status for the Wikibooks logo on Commons to CC BY-SA 3.0: How do we know that the Foundation is the copyright holder for the Wikibooks logo? Tomasz ___ Wikimedia-l mailing

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Non-free images in collaborations

2014-03-19 Thread Yana Welinder
Hi Mike, Some of the Wikimedia logos are already licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 and we want them to be consistently licensed, to the extent that we can. Thanks, Yana On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 12:50 PM, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote: Hi Yana, That's a good change - thanks for making it.

[Wikimedia-l] Non-free images in collaborations

2014-03-10 Thread James Heilman
@ Yana. You write But we hope to make them all freely licensed eventually and have already done so for newer logos (e.g. the new Wikivoyage logo). But commons does not reflect this https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page Please advise? -- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian The

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Non-free images in collaborations

2014-03-10 Thread James Alexander
I'm confused about what you mean? The Wikivoyage logo for example is certainly marked as free https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikivoyage-logo.svg can you clarify? James Alexander Legal and Community Advocacy Wikimedia Foundation (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at

[Wikimedia-l] Non-free images in collaborations

2014-03-10 Thread James Heilman
My apologies. You are indeed correct. -- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine www.opentextbookofmedicine.com ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Non-free images in collaborations

2014-03-09 Thread Tomasz Ganicz
We are puting information about colaboration on our chapter's wiki - with uploading logos locally with agreement of logo owners. Many Wikipedias - including Polish one does not accept non-free media at all. 2014-03-09 6:07 GMT+01:00 James Heilman jmh...@gmail.com: Currently our policies do not

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Non-free images in collaborations

2014-03-09 Thread Yana Welinder
Hi Rupert, Some Wikimedia logos are not currently under a free license for historic reasons. But we hope to make them all freely licensed eventually and have already done so for newer logos (e.g. the new Wikivoyage logo). Thanks, Yana -- Yana Welinder Legal Counsel Wikimedia Foundation

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Non-free images in collaborations

2014-03-09 Thread Bohdan Melnychuk
BTW some chapters wikis on WMF servers have no EDP and loads of such logos :/ --Base 09.03.2014 10:07, Tomasz Ganicz написав(ла): We are puting information about colaboration on our chapter's wiki - with uploading logos locally with agreement of logo owners. Many Wikipedias - including Polish

[Wikimedia-l] Non-free images in collaborations

2014-03-08 Thread James Heilman
Currently our policies do not allow the use of logos of organizations we are collaborating with, even with permission from these organizations, in the non mainspace areas of Wikipedia where we are collaborating. As this use with permission is legal, it is not in mainspace, and it promotes the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Non-free images in collaborations

2014-03-08 Thread rupert THURNER
hi, i talked to james about the reasoning. it seems unequal that wikimedia's logo is restricted and allowed, the partners logo not. imo we should put the wikimedia logo's under a standard license, because the wikimedia foundation is giving a bad example without gaining a lot. rupert. On Sun,