I had a roundtable discussion last night with some Wikimedians and other
sympathizers, and was persuaded that the best way to handle this matter
might indeed be for the community to delete the files in question and/or to
block the uploader for alleged bad-faith behavior. This still leaves me
wondering if WMF Legal could be involved in the legal defense of the
reusers if they acted in good faith in attempting to comply with the
license terms as they understood them on Commons.
Regarding Jan-Bart's point, I was thinking in the context of WMF's $68
million budget and specifically of the reactive capacity that is built in;
it seems to me that attention to this situation is a good use of that
reactive capacity with a de minimis effect on the big picture in terms of
cost. But I should have chosen my words more carefully, and I agree with
Jan-Bart that some community (and WMF) requests and demands for other
people's time can be excessively resource-intensive, particularly regarding
use of volunteer time.
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: