Kat,
Thanks for the comments. You say that CC has its struggles but this is not
something I currently see
as a major concern. Would you be able to encourage CC to post more recent
990s and audits so that others can evaluate for ourselves? If CC published
a rehabilitation plan, that would be
See also https://creativecommons.org/board ,
https://creativecommons.org/tag/ceo
It's important to note that CC has dozens of independent national
chapters (affiliates
https://wiki.creativecommons.org/Category:Jurisdictions ), many of which
are university centres/departments; some are rather
It appears to me from my surface-level review that there are some long-term
finance and governance troubles at the main CC org. Now seems like a good
time for WMF and other relevant orgs to develop a contingency plan in case
the main CC org continues to have problems or ceases to be functional. I
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 7:29 AM, Kat Walsh k...@mindspillage.org wrote:
tl;dr: CC has its struggles but this is not something I currently see
as a major concern.
Is there something we can do as
* Wikimedia movement?
* Wikimedia Foundation?
Aubrey
Hi.
On the subject of Creative Commons...
How stable is the Creative Commons organization lately?
How tied together are Creative Commons the non-profit organization and
Creative Commons the licenses?
Or perhaps more bluntly: if Creative Commons the organization collapses,
what's the likely
Good questions. Their Board of Directors page contains long outdated
information, the last Form 990 posted on their website is from tax year
2012 (!) suggests at first glance that they had some big financial problems
that year, and the most recent audit that they posted is also for tax year
2012.
Yeah, it seems like they have the deed in a bunch of languages now but the
actual full license is officially only in En,no and fi (
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode#languages )
James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
I guess I am in as good a place as any to try to answer this question
(and I'm speaking only for myself, here).
I think only the barest sliver of the organization needs to exist for
the licenses to exist--that is, someone willing to carry on the name
and core mission, even if the org can't itself
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 10:05 PM, James Alexander jalexan...@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Yeah, it seems like they have the deed in a bunch of languages now but the
actual full license is officially only in En,no and fi (
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode#languages )
James
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
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,
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.
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
Pine W, 10/02/2015 10:13:
in order to maintain continuity
with new content
What?
Nemo
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
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
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
16 matches
Mail list logo
