Re: [Wikimedia-l] Interpretation of CC NC from SUISA

[Mister Thrapostibongles]

Benjamin

There appear to be misconceptions about the CC licences in general.  They
may be free in the sense of no money changing hands but that does not mean
they are free in the sense of being without conditions or restrictions.
The CC-BY-SA licences that Wikipedia uses allow for use of material on
certain conditions, including attribution.  The NC licences impose
additional conditions.  But in either case conditions are imposed.

In passing, and more within the orbit of this discussion group, we may note
that while there are conditions on the use of CC-BY-SA material, they are
routinely violated.  As has been noted previously, Amazon does not provide
the attribution required when it reuses Wikipedia material via Alexa.
Strictly speaking I suppose the remedy is in the hands of the individual
volunteers as owners of the rights.  It is regrettable that the Foundation
has not chosen to support them in this.

Thrapostibongles

On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 1:22 AM Benjamin Ikuta 
wrote:

>
>
> Do you think it might be a common misconception, perhaps?
>
>
>
> On May 20, 2019, at 6:39 AM, Paulo Santos Perneta 
> wrote:
>
> > The idea that NC is "open and free" is growing like a cancer in Brazil
> and
> > Portugal. I've been noticing that for some time already, and I do believe
> > we as a Movement should have some sort of plan or strategy to fight that
> -
> > and never indulge in accepting NC as a valid license for the Wikimedia
> > projects, as IMO it really hinders our mission of a free and open
> project.
> >
> > Paulo
> >
> > Yury Bulka  escreveu no dia segunda,
> > 20/05/2019 à(s) 07:28:
> >
> >>> From: Mister Thrapostibongles 
> >>>
> >>> I'm not quite sure what you mean here.  Firstly, this isn't the right
> >> venue
> >>> for a discussion of the general principle of non-commercial licensing,
> >>> especially as the Foundation has decided on the use of licences that
> >> permit
> >>> commercial reuse.
> >> In my opition it's not a terribly offtopic subject for this list, but
> >> let my clarify that my intent is not to revisit the current licensing
> >> policy of Wikimedia projects.
> >>
> >> I just thought that this could be useful to someone advocating for the
> >> use of fully libre licenses (the ones without any non-commercial
> >> clauses) outside Wikimedia projects, as it shows how the non-commercial
> >> clause could be interpreted by some actors that have resources and
> >> rights to go to court over your use of the work.
> >>
> >>> And secondly, there's nothing to prevent a rights owner
> >>> from granting a full/libre licence if they want to for the works they
> >> own:
> >>> so why would one need to advocate for it, here or anywhere else?
> >> Because many people think that non-commercial is good enough, for
> >> instance MPs establishing laws touching Freedom of Panorama.
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> Yury.
> >>
> >> ___
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >> 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Interpretation of CC NC from SUISA

[James Heilman]

Either advocacy or partnerships. Would be nice to see that license
deprecated or at least no longer supported by Creative Commons.

James

On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 10:36 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Where would it fit in Strategy 2030? Advocacy?
>
> Paulo
>
> James Heilman  escreveu no dia segunda, 20/05/2019 à(s)
> 05:41:
>
> > We all agree NC licenses are poor. The WMF position was a reflection of
> the
> > community's position at the time and this likely remains the community's
> > position today.
> >
> > If we as a movement however were to decide we want to allow NC video such
> > that we can use Khan academy and Ted talks I doubt the WMF would veto it.
> > We do count as non commercial. It would however decrease the incentive
> for
> > these groups to drop NC but they are unlikely to regardless.
> >
> > Not sure if the strategy process is considering this specific question.
> >
> > On Mon, May 20, 2019, 09:41 Mister Thrapostibongles <
> > thrapostibong...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > James
> > >
> > > > Per "the Foundation has decided", it is not the foundation but our
> > > movement
> > > > that has decided that we will mostly only allow licenses that allow
> > > > commercial reuse.
> > > >
> > >
> > > That doesn't seem quite right.  The Foundation Board adopted a
> resolution
> > > on 23 March 2007,  which is published at
> > > https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Licensing_policy and
> > > cross-referred to on Wikipedia as still current, headed
> > >
> > > > This policy is approved by the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> > > > .
> > > > It may not be circumvented, eroded, or ignored by Wikimedia
> Foundation
> > > > officers or staff nor local policies of any Wikimedia project
> > > > .
> > >
> > >
> > > and statng
> > >
> > >- All projects are expected to host only content which is under a
> Free
> > >Content License, or which is otherwise free as recognized by the
> > >'Definition of Free Cultural Works' as referenced above.
> > >
> > > So it seems to me that it is the Foundation not the movement that
> > controls
> > > the licensing.
> > >
> > > Thrapostibongles
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 



-- 
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Interpretation of CC NC from SUISA

[Benjamin Ikuta]

Do you think it might be a common misconception, perhaps? 



On May 20, 2019, at 6:39 AM, Paulo Santos Perneta  
wrote:

> The idea that NC is "open and free" is growing like a cancer in Brazil and
> Portugal. I've been noticing that for some time already, and I do believe
> we as a Movement should have some sort of plan or strategy to fight that -
> and never indulge in accepting NC as a valid license for the Wikimedia
> projects, as IMO it really hinders our mission of a free and open project.
> 
> Paulo
> 
> Yury Bulka  escreveu no dia segunda,
> 20/05/2019 à(s) 07:28:
> 
>>> From: Mister Thrapostibongles 
>>> 
>>> I'm not quite sure what you mean here.  Firstly, this isn't the right
>> venue
>>> for a discussion of the general principle of non-commercial licensing,
>>> especially as the Foundation has decided on the use of licences that
>> permit
>>> commercial reuse.
>> In my opition it's not a terribly offtopic subject for this list, but
>> let my clarify that my intent is not to revisit the current licensing
>> policy of Wikimedia projects.
>> 
>> I just thought that this could be useful to someone advocating for the
>> use of fully libre licenses (the ones without any non-commercial
>> clauses) outside Wikimedia projects, as it shows how the non-commercial
>> clause could be interpreted by some actors that have resources and
>> rights to go to court over your use of the work.
>> 
>>> And secondly, there's nothing to prevent a rights owner
>>> from granting a full/libre licence if they want to for the works they
>> own:
>>> so why would one need to advocate for it, here or anywhere else?
>> Because many people think that non-commercial is good enough, for
>> instance MPs establishing laws touching Freedom of Panorama.
>> 
>> Best,
>> Yury.
>> 
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Interpretation of CC NC from SUISA

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

The idea that NC is "open and free" is growing like a cancer in Brazil and
Portugal. I've been noticing that for some time already, and I do believe
we as a Movement should have some sort of plan or strategy to fight that -
and never indulge in accepting NC as a valid license for the Wikimedia
projects, as IMO it really hinders our mission of a free and open project.

Paulo

Yury Bulka  escreveu no dia segunda,
20/05/2019 à(s) 07:28:

> > From: Mister Thrapostibongles 
> >
> > I'm not quite sure what you mean here.  Firstly, this isn't the right
> venue
> > for a discussion of the general principle of non-commercial licensing,
> > especially as the Foundation has decided on the use of licences that
> permit
> > commercial reuse.
> In my opition it's not a terribly offtopic subject for this list, but
> let my clarify that my intent is not to revisit the current licensing
> policy of Wikimedia projects.
>
> I just thought that this could be useful to someone advocating for the
> use of fully libre licenses (the ones without any non-commercial
> clauses) outside Wikimedia projects, as it shows how the non-commercial
> clause could be interpreted by some actors that have resources and
> rights to go to court over your use of the work.
>
> > And secondly, there's nothing to prevent a rights owner
> > from granting a full/libre licence if they want to for the works they
> own:
> > so why would one need to advocate for it, here or anywhere else?
> Because many people think that non-commercial is good enough, for
> instance MPs establishing laws touching Freedom of Panorama.
>
> Best,
> Yury.
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Interpretation of CC NC from SUISA

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Where would it fit in Strategy 2030? Advocacy?

Paulo

James Heilman  escreveu no dia segunda, 20/05/2019 à(s)
05:41:

> We all agree NC licenses are poor. The WMF position was a reflection of the
> community's position at the time and this likely remains the community's
> position today.
>
> If we as a movement however were to decide we want to allow NC video such
> that we can use Khan academy and Ted talks I doubt the WMF would veto it.
> We do count as non commercial. It would however decrease the incentive for
> these groups to drop NC but they are unlikely to regardless.
>
> Not sure if the strategy process is considering this specific question.
>
> On Mon, May 20, 2019, 09:41 Mister Thrapostibongles <
> thrapostibong...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > James
> >
> > > Per "the Foundation has decided", it is not the foundation but our
> > movement
> > > that has decided that we will mostly only allow licenses that allow
> > > commercial reuse.
> > >
> >
> > That doesn't seem quite right.  The Foundation Board adopted a resolution
> > on 23 March 2007,  which is published at
> > https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Licensing_policy and
> > cross-referred to on Wikipedia as still current, headed
> >
> > > This policy is approved by the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> > > .
> > > It may not be circumvented, eroded, or ignored by Wikimedia Foundation
> > > officers or staff nor local policies of any Wikimedia project
> > > .
> >
> >
> > and statng
> >
> >- All projects are expected to host only content which is under a Free
> >Content License, or which is otherwise free as recognized by the
> >'Definition of Free Cultural Works' as referenced above.
> >
> > So it seems to me that it is the Foundation not the movement that
> controls
> > the licensing.
> >
> > Thrapostibongles
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Interpretation of CC NC from SUISA

[Yury Bulka]

> From: Lane Rasberry 
>
> In 2009 Creative Commons published "Defining Noncommercial", a 250-page
> report presenting survey data on what people consider to be
> "noncommercial". There is a copy of the report at
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_Commons_NonCommercial_license
Thanks a lot, I didn't know about this report.

> Creative Commons calls NC licenses "non-free", which I think is a great
> place to start any conversation about them.
Good point.

Best,
Yury.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Interpretation of CC NC from SUISA

[Yury Bulka]

> From: Mister Thrapostibongles 
>
> I'm not quite sure what you mean here.  Firstly, this isn't the right venue
> for a discussion of the general principle of non-commercial licensing,
> especially as the Foundation has decided on the use of licences that permit
> commercial reuse.
In my opition it's not a terribly offtopic subject for this list, but
let my clarify that my intent is not to revisit the current licensing
policy of Wikimedia projects.

I just thought that this could be useful to someone advocating for the
use of fully libre licenses (the ones without any non-commercial
clauses) outside Wikimedia projects, as it shows how the non-commercial
clause could be interpreted by some actors that have resources and
rights to go to court over your use of the work.

> And secondly, there's nothing to prevent a rights owner
> from granting a full/libre licence if they want to for the works they own:
> so why would one need to advocate for it, here or anywhere else?
Because many people think that non-commercial is good enough, for
instance MPs establishing laws touching Freedom of Panorama.

Best,
Yury.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Interpretation of CC NC from SUISA

[James Heilman]

We all agree NC licenses are poor. The WMF position was a reflection of the
community's position at the time and this likely remains the community's
position today.

If we as a movement however were to decide we want to allow NC video such
that we can use Khan academy and Ted talks I doubt the WMF would veto it.
We do count as non commercial. It would however decrease the incentive for
these groups to drop NC but they are unlikely to regardless.

Not sure if the strategy process is considering this specific question.

On Mon, May 20, 2019, 09:41 Mister Thrapostibongles <
thrapostibong...@gmail.com> wrote:

> James
>
> > Per "the Foundation has decided", it is not the foundation but our
> movement
> > that has decided that we will mostly only allow licenses that allow
> > commercial reuse.
> >
>
> That doesn't seem quite right.  The Foundation Board adopted a resolution
> on 23 March 2007,  which is published at
> https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Licensing_policy and
> cross-referred to on Wikipedia as still current, headed
>
> > This policy is approved by the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> > .
> > It may not be circumvented, eroded, or ignored by Wikimedia Foundation
> > officers or staff nor local policies of any Wikimedia project
> > .
>
>
> and statng
>
>- All projects are expected to host only content which is under a Free
>Content License, or which is otherwise free as recognized by the
>'Definition of Free Cultural Works' as referenced above.
>
> So it seems to me that it is the Foundation not the movement that controls
> the licensing.
>
> Thrapostibongles
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Interpretation of CC NC from SUISA

[Mister Thrapostibongles]

James

> Per "the Foundation has decided", it is not the foundation but our movement
> that has decided that we will mostly only allow licenses that allow
> commercial reuse.
>

That doesn't seem quite right.  The Foundation Board adopted a resolution
on 23 March 2007,  which is published at
https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Licensing_policy and
cross-referred to on Wikipedia as still current, headed

> This policy is approved by the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> .
> It may not be circumvented, eroded, or ignored by Wikimedia Foundation
> officers or staff nor local policies of any Wikimedia project
> .


and statng

   - All projects are expected to host only content which is under a Free
   Content License, or which is otherwise free as recognized by the
   'Definition of Free Cultural Works' as referenced above.

So it seems to me that it is the Foundation not the movement that controls
the licensing.

Thrapostibongles
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Interpretation of CC NC from SUISA

[Lane Rasberry]

In 2009 Creative Commons published "Defining Noncommercial", a 250-page
report presenting survey data on what people consider to be
"noncommercial". There is a copy of the report at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_Commons_NonCommercial_license

My summary of that report is that no one knows or cares what noncommercial
means, except that it is better than completely closed but still should not
be called free or open media. the majority of media using any CC license
has an NC license. Creative Commons advises that they do not know how to
define "noncommercial", and neither does anyone else. No one has any intent
to clarify the situation. Creators and consumers demand the ambiguity as a
feature. In practice, content creators imagine whatever they like when they
apply the license to their work, and remixers imagine whatever they like
when they reuse the work. The differences in imagination never get
reconciled or checked, and typically no one cares.

There is no organization anywhere which has ever given a reasonable or
thoughtful explanation for why they use NC licenses, where their concept
matches any common understanding of what an NC license actually does.

Creative Commons calls NC licenses "non-free", which I think is a great
place to start any conversation about them.

If anyone knows of an reasonable essay or statement justifying the use of
these licenses then please share on the article's talk page.

On Sun, May 19, 2019 at 6:17 AM James Heilman  wrote:

> Per "the Foundation has decided", it is not the foundation but our movement
> that has decided that we will mostly only allow licenses that allow
> commercial reuse.
>
> By the way EN WP also allows fair use of certain images which may not
> permit commercial reuse in certain jurisdictions.
>
> James
>
> On Sun, May 19, 2019 at 11:48 AM Mister Thrapostibongles <
> thrapostibong...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Yury
> >
> > I'm not quite sure what you mean here.  Firstly, this isn't the right
> venue
> > for a discussion of the general principle of non-commercial licensing,
> > especially as the Foundation has decided on the use of licences that
> permit
> > commercial reuse.  And secondly, there's nothing to prevent a rights
> owner
> > from granting a full/libre licence if they want to for the works they
> own:
> > so why would one need to advocate for it, here or anywhere else?
> >
> > Thrapostibongles
> >
> > On Sat, May 18, 2019 at 10:42 AM Yury Bulka <
> > setthemf...@privacyrequired.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hello everyone,
> > >
> > > Just stumbled upon an page where Swiss collecting society SUISA lists
> > > things which they consider commercial use within CC NC licenses, as
> > > applied to works they have copyright on (delegated from authors who are
> > > their members). It's quite interesting and I think it is a very good
> > > example for advocating for fully free/libre licensing of works.
> > >
> > > Here's the page:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://www.suisa.ch/en/members/authors/how-to-register-a-work/creative-commons.html
> > >
> > > The list of uses that they consider commercial use is quite
> > > interesting. For instance, it includes things like:
> > >
> > > - involving a counterpart, of a financial or other nature, regardless
> of
> > > the beneficiary, title or grounds;
> > > - in exchange for other goods, whether or not the exchange generates
> > >   direct or indirect revenues or gives rise to a payment of any nature
> > >   whatsoever;
> > > - at places of work;
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Yury.
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
>
>
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 



-- 
Lane Rasberry
user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia
206.801.0814
l...@bluerasberry.com
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Interpretation of CC NC from SUISA

[James Heilman]

Per "the Foundation has decided", it is not the foundation but our movement
that has decided that we will mostly only allow licenses that allow
commercial reuse.

By the way EN WP also allows fair use of certain images which may not
permit commercial reuse in certain jurisdictions.

James

On Sun, May 19, 2019 at 11:48 AM Mister Thrapostibongles <
thrapostibong...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yury
>
> I'm not quite sure what you mean here.  Firstly, this isn't the right venue
> for a discussion of the general principle of non-commercial licensing,
> especially as the Foundation has decided on the use of licences that permit
> commercial reuse.  And secondly, there's nothing to prevent a rights owner
> from granting a full/libre licence if they want to for the works they own:
> so why would one need to advocate for it, here or anywhere else?
>
> Thrapostibongles
>
> On Sat, May 18, 2019 at 10:42 AM Yury Bulka <
> setthemf...@privacyrequired.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > Just stumbled upon an page where Swiss collecting society SUISA lists
> > things which they consider commercial use within CC NC licenses, as
> > applied to works they have copyright on (delegated from authors who are
> > their members). It's quite interesting and I think it is a very good
> > example for advocating for fully free/libre licensing of works.
> >
> > Here's the page:
> >
> >
> https://www.suisa.ch/en/members/authors/how-to-register-a-work/creative-commons.html
> >
> > The list of uses that they consider commercial use is quite
> > interesting. For instance, it includes things like:
> >
> > - involving a counterpart, of a financial or other nature, regardless of
> > the beneficiary, title or grounds;
> > - in exchange for other goods, whether or not the exchange generates
> >   direct or indirect revenues or gives rise to a payment of any nature
> >   whatsoever;
> > - at places of work;
> >
> > Best,
> > Yury.
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 



-- 
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Interpretation of CC NC from SUISA

[Mister Thrapostibongles]

Yury

I'm not quite sure what you mean here.  Firstly, this isn't the right venue
for a discussion of the general principle of non-commercial licensing,
especially as the Foundation has decided on the use of licences that permit
commercial reuse.  And secondly, there's nothing to prevent a rights owner
from granting a full/libre licence if they want to for the works they own:
so why would one need to advocate for it, here or anywhere else?

Thrapostibongles

On Sat, May 18, 2019 at 10:42 AM Yury Bulka 
wrote:

> Hello everyone,
>
> Just stumbled upon an page where Swiss collecting society SUISA lists
> things which they consider commercial use within CC NC licenses, as
> applied to works they have copyright on (delegated from authors who are
> their members). It's quite interesting and I think it is a very good
> example for advocating for fully free/libre licensing of works.
>
> Here's the page:
>
> https://www.suisa.ch/en/members/authors/how-to-register-a-work/creative-commons.html
>
> The list of uses that they consider commercial use is quite
> interesting. For instance, it includes things like:
>
> - involving a counterpart, of a financial or other nature, regardless of
> the beneficiary, title or grounds;
> - in exchange for other goods, whether or not the exchange generates
>   direct or indirect revenues or gives rise to a payment of any nature
>   whatsoever;
> - at places of work;
>
> Best,
> Yury.
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Interpretation of CC NC from SUISA

[James Heilman]

Interesting. So nearly everything is covered by a place of work. So there
opinion appears to be that the NC license is simple a way to pretend one is
using an open license well changing nothing.

On Sat, May 18, 2019, 18:42 Yury Bulka 
wrote:

> Hello everyone,
>
> Just stumbled upon an page where Swiss collecting society SUISA lists
> things which they consider commercial use within CC NC licenses, as
> applied to works they have copyright on (delegated from authors who are
> their members). It's quite interesting and I think it is a very good
> example for advocating for fully free/libre licensing of works.
>
> Here's the page:
>
> https://www.suisa.ch/en/members/authors/how-to-register-a-work/creative-commons.html
>
> The list of uses that they consider commercial use is quite
> interesting. For instance, it includes things like:
>
> - involving a counterpart, of a financial or other nature, regardless of
> the beneficiary, title or grounds;
> - in exchange for other goods, whether or not the exchange generates
>   direct or indirect revenues or gives rise to a payment of any nature
>   whatsoever;
> - at places of work;
>
> Best,
> Yury.
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Interpretation of CC NC from SUISA

[Yury Bulka]

Hello everyone,

Just stumbled upon an page where Swiss collecting society SUISA lists
things which they consider commercial use within CC NC licenses, as
applied to works they have copyright on (delegated from authors who are
their members). It's quite interesting and I think it is a very good
example for advocating for fully free/libre licensing of works.

Here's the page:
https://www.suisa.ch/en/members/authors/how-to-register-a-work/creative-commons.html

The list of uses that they consider commercial use is quite
interesting. For instance, it includes things like:

- involving a counterpart, of a financial or other nature, regardless of the 
beneficiary, title or grounds;
- in exchange for other goods, whether or not the exchange generates
  direct or indirect revenues or gives rise to a payment of any nature
  whatsoever;
- at places of work;

Best,
Yury.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,