Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos

2015-02-15 Thread Pine W
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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos

2015-02-15 Thread Federico Leva (Nemo)
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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos

2015-02-15 Thread Pine W
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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos

2015-02-14 Thread Andrea Zanni
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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos

2015-02-13 Thread MZMcBride
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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos

2015-02-13 Thread Pine W
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 Their Board of Directors page contains long outdated information, the last Form 990 posted on their website is from tax year 2012 (!)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.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos

2015-02-13 Thread James Alexander
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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos

2015-02-13 Thread Kat Walsh
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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos

2015-02-13 Thread James Alexander
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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos

2015-02-12 Thread Michael Peel
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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos

2015-02-12 Thread Kat Walsh
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,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos

2015-02-12 Thread Kat Walsh
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.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos

2015-02-12 Thread Luis Villa
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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos

2015-02-10 Thread Federico Leva (Nemo)
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:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos

2014-10-28 Thread Luis Villa
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