Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Tim Starling wrote: On 17/01/14 01:14, Todd Allen wrote: This proposal asks to move to a free as in beer model, where content will be free to view, but not necessarily to reuse (and with the opaque license, it may not even be possible to tell). I don't really understand this argument. It's

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, I am happy for people to upload files when we can convert it to another format. Given that the issue is around the ability to re-use media files in the H.264 format, providing these files to our users is exactly the issue that is being discussed. Consequently it is controversial. Thanks,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Todd Allen
On Jan 16, 2014 11:05 PM, Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org wrote: On 17/01/14 01:14, Todd Allen wrote: This proposal asks to move to a free as in beer model, where content will be free to view, but not necessarily to reuse (and with the opaque license, it may not even be possible to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Fajro
FYI it's against the bylaws of at least 4 chapters (Argentina, Chile, Uruguay and Venezuela) to promote content in non-free formats. -- Fajro ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread David Gerard
On 17 January 2014 14:19, Fajro fai...@gmail.com wrote: FYI it's against the bylaws of at least 4 chapters (Argentina, Chile, Uruguay and Venezuela) to promote content in non-free formats. Do you have the precise wording handy? e.g. What constitutes promotion? - d.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Fajro
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 11:24 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 17 January 2014 14:19, Fajro fai...@gmail.com wrote: Do you have the precise wording handy? e.g. What constitutes promotion? From Wikimedia Argentina bylaws: *The Association's goals are:* To actively contribute to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Ted Chien
From my knowledge when I was working as an engineer in the multimedia software company back in 2006, if there's no transcoding to MP* formats, no patent fee is required. So if you upload MP4 files then download them without any transcoding it should be fine (correct me if I'm wrong). We'd only

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread David Gerard
On 17 January 2014 15:03, Ted Chien hsiangtai.ch...@gmail.com wrote: From my knowledge when I was working as an engineer in the multimedia software company back in 2006, if there's no transcoding to MP* formats, no patent fee is required. So if you upload MP4 files then download them without

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Strainu
2014/1/16 Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com: As much as I am pushing for MP4 adoption in Wikimedia to help our lagging video efforts, MPEG-4 patent holders/licensors are not helping their case: [snip] I worry more about the no, because that would mean more video content uploaded to commons votes

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Chad Horohoe
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 7:55 AM, Strainu strain...@gmail.com wrote: 2014/1/16 Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com: As much as I am pushing for MP4 adoption in Wikimedia to help our lagging video efforts, MPEG-4 patent holders/licensors are not helping their case: [snip] I worry more about

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Andrew Lih
BTW, Luis from WMF has put a very lengthy and detailed analysis of the legal issues that does help quite a bit, at the end of the RFC: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Requests_for_comment/MP4_Video#Commercial_use_and_h264 TLDR: …there may be good moral, ethical, and strategic reasons

[Wikimedia-l] This weird trick will make readers of mass messages on village pumps happier

2014-01-17 Thread Amir E. Aharoni
Got your attention? :) Various mass messages are occasionally sent to village pumps in many projects - by the Foundation's community liaisons, by researchers, and others. Sometimes people bother to put them up for translation, which is wonderful, but sometimes it is not practical, for example if

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread The Cunctator
Given that allowing mp4 would be an act of commercial expedience at the expense of core Wikipedia principles, let me make the modest suggestion of introducing mp4 in concert with a name change to Encarta. On Jan 16, 2014 5:15 AM, Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com wrote: Great post Manuel, and I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread The Cunctator
He wasn't assuming bad faith; he was accurately describing the situation without ascribing intent. On Jan 16, 2014 7:36 AM, Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 9:14 AM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: There aren't two principles in conflict here. This

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Nathan
There's an article about the debate up from yesterday on Ars: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/01/wikimedia-considers-supporting-h-264-to-boost-accessibility-content/ ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread David Gerard
A pile of press is linked at the top of the talk page. - d. On 17 January 2014 16:43, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: There's an article about the debate up from yesterday on Ars:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Andrew Lih wrote: BTW, Luis from WMF has put a very lengthy and detailed analysis of the legal issues that does help quite a bit, at the end of the RFC: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Requests_for_comment/MP4_Video#Commercial_use_and_h264 I note that the Wikimedia Foundation does

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Nathan
One thing that hasn't come up in the debate is the relative importance of Wikimedia's approach to video, given the existing video ecosystem. YouTube enables cc-by uploading and has 4 million videos with a free license, and 6.5 million videos that are explicitly educational. Are we sure focusing on

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Nathan
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: One thing that hasn't come up in the debate is the relative importance of Wikimedia's approach to video, given the existing video ecosystem. YouTube enables cc-by uploading and has 4 million videos with a free license, and 6.5

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Extensive feedback from WMDE to the FDC process

2014-01-17 Thread Balázs Viczián
My five cents here would be that how about considering longer time frames for grants, like 2-3-5 years (I was too tired to understandably explain this yesterday to Anasuya) Here in Hungary individuals can offer 1% of their income tax to nonprofit organizations (these are accounted and transferred

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread David Gerard
On 17 January 2014 17:12, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: property yoke. Commons' great benefit to the world is no-questions-asked reusability, and I don't want to see it compromised in this fashion, license freebie or otherwise. I'm with User:David

[Wikimedia-l] 2014 Ombudsman Commission

2014-01-17 Thread Maggie Dennis
Hello, everyone. I'm writing with information about the Ombudsman Commission (OC), the small group of volunteers who investigate complaints about violations of the privacy policy, and in particular concerning the use of CheckUser tools, on any Wikimedia project for the Board of Trustees. I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Emmanuel Engelhart
Le 16/01/2014 20:13, geni a écrit : On 16 January 2014 13:02, Emmanuel Engelhart kel...@kiwix.org wrote: Dirac, a free codec developed by the BBC, seems to be a good solution. Do people have some experiences with Dirac? No. BBC managed to get it working dedicated machines a few years back

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Ted Chien
Hi David, We were selling video editing softwares at that time, and that's what I remebered for the MPEG-4 royalties. But MPEG LA would do the license thing case by case, maybe my information is not correct now. I just found that MPEG LA has announced in 2010 that it will not charge royalties

Re: [Wikimedia-l] This weird trick will make readers of mass messages on village pumps happier

2014-01-17 Thread James Forrester
On 17 January 2014 08:24, Amir E. Aharoni amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.ilwrote: Put it inside the following HTML tag: div lang=en dir=ltr class=mw-content-ltr Your important notification. /div ​[Snip]​ Of course, it's not great to have to remember to write it every time, so if there is a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Multimedia Vision for 2016

2014-01-17 Thread Jane Darnell
Yes, an interesting vision indeed and I like these use cases. Having read the other thread about the copyright difficulties with video codecs and I understand this vision is a long way off, but I like this short intro to keep us all on point about what we would like to see: ease of use in

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Andrew Lih
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 12:05 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann derhoe...@gmx.netwrote: * Andrew Lih wrote: BTW, Luis from WMF has put a very lengthy and detailed analysis of the legal issues that does help quite a bit, at the end of the RFC:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Andrew Lih
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: One thing that hasn't come up in the debate is the relative importance of Wikimedia's approach to video, given the existing video ecosystem. YouTube enables cc-by uploading and has 4 million videos with a free license, and 6.5

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Andrew Lih
I'm not sure what debate you're referring to. If it's about whether video belongs in Wikipedia, I don't think it's even in question. Wikipedia started in 2001 as all text. It didn't have photos then, we now have photos. It didn't have audio then, we now have audio. It didn't have video then, we

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Nathan
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com wrote: I'm not sure what debate you're referring to. If it's about whether video belongs in Wikipedia, I don't think it's even in question. Wikipedia started in 2001 as all text. It didn't have photos then, we now have photos.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Andrew Lih wrote: Read the details and you'll see that free (as in beer) Internet Broadcast video doesn't need a license. SUMMARY OF AVC/H.264 LICENSE TERMS: http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/avc/Documents/AVC_TermsSummary.pdf In the case of Internet Broadcast AVC Video (AVC Video that is

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Andrew Lih
Ah. Well if you're not even buying into the legitimacy of photos on Commons, I'm not sure there's a way to have a productive discussion about video. -Andrew On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Nathan
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com wrote: Ah. Well if you're not even buying into the legitimacy of photos on Commons, I'm not sure there's a way to have a productive discussion about video. -Andrew No, I think the vast repository of images, properly curated,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] This weird trick will make readers of mass messages on village pumps happier

2014-01-17 Thread Federico Leva (Nemo)
This is already in the guidelines: https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Best_practices_for_reaching_out_to_projects_in_multiple_languages You won't reach all massmessage users on this list. Nemo ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list

Re: [Wikimedia-l] This weird trick will make readers of mass messages on village pumps happier

2014-01-17 Thread Amir E. Aharoni
[OMG, I actually wrote quite a lot of that page.] -- Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי http://aharoni.wordpress.com ‪“We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬ 2014/1/17 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com This is already in the guidelines:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Michael Peel
On 17 Jan 2014, at 19:11, Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: One thing that hasn't come up in the debate is the relative importance of Wikimedia's approach to video, given the existing video ecosystem. YouTube enables

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Samuel Klein
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 9:14 AM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: This proposal asks to move to a free as in beer model, where content will be free to view, but not necessarily to reuse I'm not sure this is correct. There are two different implementations possible. * Accept MP4 and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Victor Grigas
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 3:33 PM, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 9:14 AM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: This proposal asks to move to a free as in beer model, where content will be free to view, but not necessarily to reuse I'm not sure this is

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Thanking anonymous users

2014-01-17 Thread Mark
On 1/17/14, 3:55 AM, Erik Zachte wrote: Here are some charts which breakdown edits into several categories, reverts are counted separately. Of course edits is not editors, but it could be indicative of changed behavior patterns/policies. In the ongoing reassesment of metric definitions one

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread MZMcBride
David Gerard wrote: Given Commons' attitude on even incredibly unlikely copyright risks ... it's just ridiculous to assume such a provision on a format would be allowed to pass. I see at least one person has deemed it a snowball-pass after just a few hours. I find this ... unlikely.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Samuel Klein
Yes. The current discussion has confused people about the things that are not very contentious: * Ingesting and converting out of more formats is good: we should start ingesting MP4 and converting on the fly. There are no major legal risks to our doing so. * We have a tiny video community; even

[Wikimedia-l] Community consultation + Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director selection process

2014-01-17 Thread MZMcBride
Hi. Is there a community consultation period built in to the selection process for a new Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director? If not, should there be? In trying to figure out what the selection process may look like, I re-reviewed some of the relevant FAQs and timelines: *