If they don't have legal resources, then it is pointless to use NC ND for the content, as they will not be suing anyone that ignores the license and commercializes it anyway.
If such knowledge can't be freely shared, then it has no place in Commons, in my opinion. If that makes it less visible, then that is the problem of the communities that don't share it freely. One cannot have both things at the same time. If it is notable, we may try to accommodate it in some projects that allow that kind of content under an exception policy. In any case, I don't believe it is in Wikimedia scope to worry about the possible misuses people can do of the content we provide, and much less to subvert our license policy in order to avoid stuff we should not be worried with in first place. Best, Paulo A quarta, 14 de ago de 2019, 23:27, Lucas Werkmeister < m...@lucaswerkmeister.de> escreveu: > I doubt that the communities in question are likely to have the same > legal resources available to them as The Coca-Cola Company, so I must > admit I don’t find this argument entirely convincing. Asking them to > share their content, but then leaving them alone in the face of any > problems arising from it, sounds more like reinforcing the status quo > than promoting knowledge equity to me. And note that the law may not be > written in their favor in the first place, so suggesting them to “secure > their concerns in a legal way” may require a lengthy legislative process > first, with uncertain outcome. > > (I must admit that I haven’t yet read the articles linked in the draft, > so this email is phrased rather vaguely. I hope it still makes sense.) > > Cheers, > Lucas > > On 14.08.19 23:51, Paulo Santos Perneta wrote: > > All this stuff about misappropriation and unwanted commercial use of > > certain content which is being used to justify the inclusion of NC/ND CC > > licenses in Commons and other Wikimedia projects, really isn't Wikimedia > > concern. If some communities object to certain types of use on content > > produced by them, they should secure them in the law, same way as > personal > > image rights, trademarks, etc. No one at Commons cares if the Coca-Cola > > logo we host there, which is both PD-old and PD-textlogo, is misused by > 3rd > > parties to sell some other cola beverage as if it was the original one. > > That's Coca Cola concern, not ours, and they are absolutely free to sue > the > > infractor. If those communities object to certain uses, first they secure > > their concerns in a legal way, then act upon it. As it is now, anyone who > > get access to that content in a legal way and wants to share it, can do > it > > freely at Commons, and nobody at Commons is going to delete it just > because > > some other people, which have not any legal right over that content, > claim > > that using it commercially is against their beliefs or traditions. > > > > Paulo > > > > geni <geni...@gmail.com> escreveu no dia quarta, 14/08/2019 à(s) 22:22: > > > >> On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 21:34, Aron Manning <aronmanni...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> . > >>> The draft already refers to 2 articles (1 > >>> <https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/20/us/slave-photographs-harvard.html > >,2 > >>> < > >> > https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=c0043945-852b-4d7e-94ad-1859f91ba418 > >>> ) > >>> that explain the need for ND. I'll ask for further sources that show > the > >>> benefits of NC and ND licensed materials. > >>> > >>> Aron > >> > >> 1 refers to images that are public domain in terms of copyright and > >> the latter is mostly talking about trademark or stuff so broad that > >> you couldn't usefuly copyright it in the first place. ND isn't a > >> useful protection in these cases (it might be of some use for current > >> individual artists but they can publish their work elsewhere). > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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, > >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > _______________________________________________ > > 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, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ 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, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
