See bottom for reply.

-----Original Message-----
From: Wikimedia-l [] On Behalf Of 
Sent: 13 August 2019 01:18
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 7:12 PM Pete Forsyth <> wrote:

> Ziko's original comment appears to derive from the "Terms of Use/Licensing"
> section of the Recommendations.[1] It says: "Present licensing for both
> text and photographs should change to allow restrictions for non-commercial
> use and no derivative works, if those will improve the ability of the
> project to better reflect diverse knowledge on a global scale, such as by
> including videos, allowing culturally significant text or photos to remain
> intact without misappropriation, etc."
> The recommendation appears to have been written in the absence of a full
> awareness of the extensive debate throughout the Wikimedia movement that
> resulted in the present policies. That debate exists in mailing list
> archives, Board of Trustees minutes, on Meta Wiki, and elsewhere.
> Wikimedia already has a framework for permitting non-free files. It's
> called an "Exemption Doctrine Policy"[2]; any project may adopt such a
> policy according to a framework defined by the WMF in a 2007 resolution.[3]
> I am someone who has tried hard to get such a policy passed on English
> Wikisource, and I have failed. I believe it would be the right choice for
> English Wikisource, but the people I have to persuade are English
> Wikisource volunteers.
> To have any weight, a recommendation like this one would need to
> demonstrate familiarity with the history behind Wikimedia's current
> policies toward licensing. Absent that, there is plenty of room to advocate
> for the use of non-free files on a project-by-project basis. Demonstrating
> an ability to win support at specific projects, and then demonstrating that
> implementing an EDP paved the way toward good results, could form a
> compelling argument.
> Strong advocacy in a strategy document does not form a compelling argument.
> -Pete
> --
> Pete Forsyth
> Volunteer primarily on English Wikipedia, English Wikisource, Wikidata,
> Commons, and Meta Wiki.
> [1]
> ?
> [2]
> [3]
One counter-argument that doesn't seem to come up that often is that the
movement as a whole may be better placed to decide the needs of the
movement as a whole than smaller, more local communities. We limit the
autonomy of local communities in many ways in order to serve the mission
and directives of the global community. Do we exclude the possibility that
the global community may decide, and may have the authority to decide, that
the mission or approach of Commons (or English Wikisource) should be
adjusted? Or if the Wikimedia movement wants a repository for NC/ND
content, should it be forced to create a new version of Commons with a
different starting policy foundation?

If the movement as a whole considers it desirable to host a repository for 
NC/ND content, then they should indeed create a new project where it would be 
welcome, and not push it where it is not welcome, because the volunteers who 
have is foisted on them are likely to leave if they don’t like it. If there is 
enough support for the content, there should be enough volunteers to deal with 
the content. If there are not enough volunteers, then the people who think the 
content is important enough can pay for people to curate it. If it succeeds, 
fine. If it fails, also fine, as it would not destroy anything else while 
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: and
New messages to:

This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.

Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: and
New messages to:

Reply via email to