Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos
According to the footer at: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ CC-BY-SA 4.0 is currently available in 34 languages/language variants: Castellano http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.es Castellano (España) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.es_ES Català http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.ca Dansk http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.da Deutsch http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.de English http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.en Esperanto http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.eo français http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.frGalego http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.gl hrvatski http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.hr Indonesia http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.id Italiano http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.it Latviski http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.lv Lietuvių http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.lt Magyar http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.hu Melayu http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.ms Nederlands http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.nl Norsk http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.no polski http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.pl Português http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.pt Português (BR) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.pt_BR Suomeksi http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.fi svenska http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.sv Türkçe http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.tr íslenska http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.isčesky http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.cs Ελληνικά http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.el русский http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.ru українська http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.uk العربية http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.ar پارسی http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.fa 日本語 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.ja 華語 (台灣) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.zh_TW 한국어 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.ko . Thanks, Mike On 12 Feb 2015, at 20:26, Luis Villa lvi...@wikimedia.org wrote: CC 4 is still only in two (three?) languages (Kat may want to weigh in?) so it is premature for us to move, I think. But I'm optimistic we'll see traction in that area soon, and then we can have a movement discussion. Sorry that we can't force that to happen faster :) [To be clear, as I've said on Commons, CC 4.0 is clearly already *acceptable* for imported images - obviously free, etc. We just shouldn't be encouraging it as the *default* anywhere until there are more languages and a movement-wide discussion.] Luis On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 1:13 AM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com mailto:wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Can we get an update on the transition plan to 4.0? I am seeing increasing amounts of content with 4.0 licensing across the the web, and would like us to move sooner rather than later to 4.0 in order to maintain continuity with new content where possible. I am not a licensing expert and I sometimes get headaches trying to deconflict licenses. Thanks, Pine On Oct 28, 2014 3:00 PM, Luis Villa lvi...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi, Rupert- I think the movement as a whole should try to move consistently to 4.0 at roughly the same time. It is confusing to re-users to have to juggle different terms for different pieces of Wikimedia content.[1] So Foundation content will generally remain 3.0 until we make 4.0 the default license across the projects. (I'm aware that some projects have taken this jump on the own, but where I've seen this, I've made similar points - for example https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiriesdiff=prevoldid=622093759 .) WMF Legal plans to launch a movement-wide 4.0 discussion when CC has issued a solid number of translations, ideally in our largest languages. I understand the first few translations will be published in the next few weeks, and there is a schedule of upcoming translations on CC's wiki https://wiki.creativecommons.org/Legal_Tools_Translation#4.0[2]. Realistically, given the holidays, and the lag for large projects, this likely means that discussion will happen early in 2015. Hope that helps- Luis [1] I'm well aware we already have a huge problem with this, but I don't want it to get worse. :) [2] These are updated by the translation teams, not CC itself, so they may not be up-to-date/accurate. On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 2:00 PM, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com wrote: Hi yana, would you be so kind to explain why wmf did not opt for the newest commons license, cc-by-sa 4.0?
[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] The Signpost -- Volume 11, Issue 6 -- 11 February 2015
From the editors: We want to know what you think! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-02-11/From_the_editors News and notes: One editor faces likely ban for work on Wikipedia; another awarded $1 million http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-02-11/News_and_notes In the media: Is Wikipedia eating itself? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-02-11/In_the_media Traffic report: Bowled over http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-02-11/Traffic_report WikiProject report: Brand new WikiProjects profiled http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-02-11/WikiProject_report Featured content: A grizzly bear, Operation Mascot, ''Freedom Planet'' Liberty Island, cosmic dust clouds, a cricket five-wicket list, more fine art, a terrible, terrible opera... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-02-11/Featured_content Gallery: Feel the love http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-02-11/Gallery Single page view http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signpost/Single/2015-02-11 PDF version http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-02-11 https://www.facebook.com/wikisignpost / https://twitter.com/wikisignpost -- Wikipedia Signpost Staff http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost ___ Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. For more information about Wikimedia-l: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote:
According to the footer at:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
CC-BY-SA 4.0 is currently available in 34 languages/language variants: [...]
This is just the deeds, not the license text itself.
-Kat
Thanks,
Mike
On 12 Feb 2015, at 20:26, Luis Villa lvi...@wikimedia.org wrote:
CC 4 is still only in two (three?) languages (Kat may want to weigh in?) so
it is premature for us to move, I think. But I'm optimistic we'll see
traction in that area soon, and then we can have a movement discussion.
Sorry that we can't force that to happen faster :)
[To be clear, as I've said on Commons, CC 4.0 is clearly already
*acceptable* for imported images - obviously free, etc. We just shouldn't
be encouraging it as the *default* anywhere until there are more languages
and a movement-wide discussion.]
Luis
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 1:13 AM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com
mailto:wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Can we get an update on the transition plan to 4.0? I am seeing increasing
amounts of content with 4.0 licensing across the the web, and would like us
to move sooner rather than later to 4.0 in order to maintain continuity
with new content where possible.
I am not a licensing expert and I sometimes get headaches trying to
deconflict licenses.
Thanks,
Pine
On Oct 28, 2014 3:00 PM, Luis Villa lvi...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi, Rupert-
I think the movement as a whole should try to move consistently to 4.0 at
roughly the same time. It is confusing to re-users to have to juggle
different terms for different pieces of Wikimedia content.[1] So
Foundation
content will generally remain 3.0 until we make 4.0 the default license
across the projects. (I'm aware that some projects have taken this jump on
the own, but where I've seen this, I've made similar points - for example
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiriesdiff=prevoldid=622093759
.)
WMF Legal plans to launch a movement-wide 4.0 discussion when CC has
issued
a solid number of translations, ideally in our largest languages. I
understand the first few translations will be published in the next few
weeks, and there is a schedule of upcoming translations on CC's wiki
https://wiki.creativecommons.org/Legal_Tools_Translation#4.0[2].
Realistically,
given the holidays, and the lag for large projects, this likely means that
discussion will happen early in 2015.
Hope that helps-
Luis
[1] I'm well aware we already have a huge problem with this, but I don't
want it to get worse. :)
[2] These are updated by the translation teams, not CC itself, so they may
not be up-to-date/accurate.
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 2:00 PM, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi yana, would you be so kind to explain why wmf did not opt for the
newest
commons license, cc-by-sa 4.0?
Rupert
On Oct 28, 2014 9:06 PM, Yana Welinder ywelin...@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Good point. That line can now be deleted from the trademark template.
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Romaine Wiki romaine.w...@gmail.com
wrote:
Practical question:
The template:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Wikimedia_trademark
contains a line: (Consider using {{Copyright by Wikimedia
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Copyright_by_Wikimedia
}}
instead)
Should that line be removed from the Wikimedia trademark template?
(including all translations)
Romaine
2014-10-28 10:36 GMT+01:00 Ting Chen wing.phil...@gmx.de:
Really cool, great work. Thank you very much.
Greetings
Ting
Am 10/27/2014 um 06:51 PM schrieb Yana Welinder:
Hi folks,
I'm happy to announce that we are re-licensing the Wikimedia logos
on
Commons to CC BY-SA 3.0:
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/10/24/wikimedia-logos-have-been-freed/
I would really appreciate your help with replacing the {{Copyright
by
Wikimedia}}
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Copyright_by_Wikimedia
[1]
templates on the logos with the {{Wikimedia trademark}}
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Wikimedia_trademark
[2]
and
{{cc-by-sa-3.0}} https://commons.wikimedia.
org/wiki/Template:Cc-by-sa-3.0[3]
templates. But we don't want to replace templates on the MediaWiki
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MediaWiki.svg[4] and the
Community
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_Community_Logo.svg
[5]
logos, which were originally released under free licenses.
There are also some pages on Commons, like this one
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Licensing[6], that
may
need
to
be updated based on the re-licensed logos.
Thanks,
Yana
[1]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Copyright_by_Wikimedia
[2]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Wikimedia_trademark
[3] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Cc-by-sa-3.0
[4]
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 12:26 PM, Luis Villa lvi...@wikimedia.org wrote:
CC 4 is still only in two (three?) languages (Kat may want to weigh in?) so
it is premature for us to move, I think. But I'm optimistic we'll see
traction in that area soon, and then we can have a movement discussion.
Sorry that we can't force that to happen faster :)
There are only two official translations of the 4.0 suite currently
(Norwegian and Finnish), with another ready to publish fairly soon,
maybe 10 or so others in progress. (I note that I'm not there anymore,
though, and can't speak to how things will go forward.)
-Kat
[To be clear, as I've said on Commons, CC 4.0 is clearly already
*acceptable* for imported images - obviously free, etc. We just shouldn't
be encouraging it as the *default* anywhere until there are more languages
and a movement-wide discussion.]
Luis
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 1:13 AM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Can we get an update on the transition plan to 4.0? I am seeing increasing
amounts of content with 4.0 licensing across the the web, and would like us
to move sooner rather than later to 4.0 in order to maintain continuity
with new content where possible.
I am not a licensing expert and I sometimes get headaches trying to
deconflict licenses.
Thanks,
Pine
On Oct 28, 2014 3:00 PM, Luis Villa lvi...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi, Rupert-
I think the movement as a whole should try to move consistently to 4.0 at
roughly the same time. It is confusing to re-users to have to juggle
different terms for different pieces of Wikimedia content.[1] So
Foundation
content will generally remain 3.0 until we make 4.0 the default license
across the projects. (I'm aware that some projects have taken this jump on
the own, but where I've seen this, I've made similar points - for example
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiriesdiff=prevoldid=622093759
.)
WMF Legal plans to launch a movement-wide 4.0 discussion when CC has
issued
a solid number of translations, ideally in our largest languages. I
understand the first few translations will be published in the next few
weeks, and there is a schedule of upcoming translations on CC's wiki
https://wiki.creativecommons.org/Legal_Tools_Translation#4.0[2].
Realistically,
given the holidays, and the lag for large projects, this likely means that
discussion will happen early in 2015.
Hope that helps-
Luis
[1] I'm well aware we already have a huge problem with this, but I don't
want it to get worse. :)
[2] These are updated by the translation teams, not CC itself, so they may
not be up-to-date/accurate.
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 2:00 PM, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi yana, would you be so kind to explain why wmf did not opt for the
newest
commons license, cc-by-sa 4.0?
Rupert
On Oct 28, 2014 9:06 PM, Yana Welinder ywelin...@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Good point. That line can now be deleted from the trademark template.
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Romaine Wiki romaine.w...@gmail.com
wrote:
Practical question:
The template:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Wikimedia_trademark
contains a line: (Consider using {{Copyright by Wikimedia
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Copyright_by_Wikimedia
}}
instead)
Should that line be removed from the Wikimedia trademark template?
(including all translations)
Romaine
2014-10-28 10:36 GMT+01:00 Ting Chen wing.phil...@gmx.de:
Really cool, great work. Thank you very much.
Greetings
Ting
Am 10/27/2014 um 06:51 PM schrieb Yana Welinder:
Hi folks,
I'm happy to announce that we are re-licensing the Wikimedia logos
on
Commons to CC BY-SA 3.0:
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/10/24/wikimedia-logos-have-been-freed/
I would really appreciate your help with replacing the {{Copyright
by
Wikimedia}}
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Copyright_by_Wikimedia
[1]
templates on the logos with the {{Wikimedia trademark}}
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Wikimedia_trademark
[2]
and
{{cc-by-sa-3.0}} https://commons.wikimedia.
org/wiki/Template:Cc-by-sa-3.0[3]
templates. But we don't want to replace templates on the MediaWiki
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MediaWiki.svg[4] and the
Community
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_Community_Logo.svg
[5]
logos, which were originally released under free licenses.
There are also some pages on Commons, like this one
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Licensing[6], that
may
need
to
be updated based on the re-licensed logos.
Thanks,
Yana
[1]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Copyright_by_Wikimedia
[2]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Wikimedia_trademark
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos
CC 4 is still only in two (three?) languages (Kat may want to weigh in?) so
it is premature for us to move, I think. But I'm optimistic we'll see
traction in that area soon, and then we can have a movement discussion.
Sorry that we can't force that to happen faster :)
[To be clear, as I've said on Commons, CC 4.0 is clearly already
*acceptable* for imported images - obviously free, etc. We just shouldn't
be encouraging it as the *default* anywhere until there are more languages
and a movement-wide discussion.]
Luis
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 1:13 AM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Can we get an update on the transition plan to 4.0? I am seeing increasing
amounts of content with 4.0 licensing across the the web, and would like us
to move sooner rather than later to 4.0 in order to maintain continuity
with new content where possible.
I am not a licensing expert and I sometimes get headaches trying to
deconflict licenses.
Thanks,
Pine
On Oct 28, 2014 3:00 PM, Luis Villa lvi...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi, Rupert-
I think the movement as a whole should try to move consistently to 4.0 at
roughly the same time. It is confusing to re-users to have to juggle
different terms for different pieces of Wikimedia content.[1] So
Foundation
content will generally remain 3.0 until we make 4.0 the default license
across the projects. (I'm aware that some projects have taken this jump on
the own, but where I've seen this, I've made similar points - for example
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiriesdiff=prevoldid=622093759
.)
WMF Legal plans to launch a movement-wide 4.0 discussion when CC has
issued
a solid number of translations, ideally in our largest languages. I
understand the first few translations will be published in the next few
weeks, and there is a schedule of upcoming translations on CC's wiki
https://wiki.creativecommons.org/Legal_Tools_Translation#4.0[2].
Realistically,
given the holidays, and the lag for large projects, this likely means that
discussion will happen early in 2015.
Hope that helps-
Luis
[1] I'm well aware we already have a huge problem with this, but I don't
want it to get worse. :)
[2] These are updated by the translation teams, not CC itself, so they may
not be up-to-date/accurate.
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 2:00 PM, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi yana, would you be so kind to explain why wmf did not opt for the
newest
commons license, cc-by-sa 4.0?
Rupert
On Oct 28, 2014 9:06 PM, Yana Welinder ywelin...@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Good point. That line can now be deleted from the trademark template.
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Romaine Wiki romaine.w...@gmail.com
wrote:
Practical question:
The template:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Wikimedia_trademark
contains a line: (Consider using {{Copyright by Wikimedia
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Copyright_by_Wikimedia
}}
instead)
Should that line be removed from the Wikimedia trademark template?
(including all translations)
Romaine
2014-10-28 10:36 GMT+01:00 Ting Chen wing.phil...@gmx.de:
Really cool, great work. Thank you very much.
Greetings
Ting
Am 10/27/2014 um 06:51 PM schrieb Yana Welinder:
Hi folks,
I'm happy to announce that we are re-licensing the Wikimedia logos
on
Commons to CC BY-SA 3.0:
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/10/24/wikimedia-logos-have-been-freed/
I would really appreciate your help with replacing the {{Copyright
by
Wikimedia}}
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Copyright_by_Wikimedia
[1]
templates on the logos with the {{Wikimedia trademark}}
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Wikimedia_trademark
[2]
and
{{cc-by-sa-3.0}} https://commons.wikimedia.
org/wiki/Template:Cc-by-sa-3.0[3]
templates. But we don't want to replace templates on the MediaWiki
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MediaWiki.svg[4] and the
Community
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_Community_Logo.svg
[5]
logos, which were originally released under free licenses.
There are also some pages on Commons, like this one
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Licensing[6], that
may
need
to
be updated based on the re-licensed logos.
Thanks,
Yana
[1]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Copyright_by_Wikimedia
[2]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Wikimedia_trademark
[3] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Cc-by-sa-3.0
[4] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MediaWiki.svg
[5]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_Community_Logo.svg
[6] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Licensing
___
