Daniel Boos wrote:
> Dear Edi
>
> Did you read the whole article? I did not talk about Facebook. As far
> as I understood your example Facebook is using Wikipedia Content on
> their platform to make it more attractive and get more money. I did
> not know that, but  this doesn't change that the statement is wrong.
> Wikimedia is a non-profit foundation (1) and not a for profit
> organization. Wikimedia is about making knowledge available. The quote
> however says that Wikimedia is a for profit organization and the same
> as google or facebook.

Well, in fact the quote doesn't mention Wikimedia, only Wikipedia ;-) - 
but I wouldn't wonder if the article's author doesn't know the 
difference. It's completely inconceivable how "Wikipedia" could be 
interested in "Marktanteile, Umsatz und Ertrag" (it's of course 
impossible to attribute motives of any kind to "Wikipedia", which is the 
sum of its authors and not a legal entity - it would have to be 
Wikimedia), and as Wikimedia relies on donations, the content of all 
Wikimedia projects is freely available, and there are no paid 
advertisements whatsoever, the quote is rightly described as nonsense.

That commercial enterprises are allowed to use Wikipedia content is an 
essential part of the Free license, as Rama Neko wrote, but doesn't make 
Wikipedia/Wikimedia itself commercial.

Best regards

Patrick Borer



> Best
> Daniel
>
> (1) http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Home
>
> 2010/8/17<egoetsc...@yabyum.ch>:
>> Dear Daniel
>>
>> Nonsense? Wikipedia articles can now be included in Facebook and
>> Facebook is more about money than social media.
>>
>> Edi
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 16:20:42 +0200, Daniel Boos<b...@allmend.ch>  wrote:
>>> Dear all
>>>
>>> the NZZ has today an article from a publisher about
>>> "Leistungsschutzrechte" for publisher. Among other inacurrencies and
>>> exaggerations (e.g. law free internet), he also writes the following
>>> sentence:
>>> "Die Internetgemeinde aber wird mit der Realität konfrontiert: Nachdem
>>> klar geworden ist, dass es weder Google noch Wikipedia um die
>>> Vermehrung des Wissens, sondern um Marktanteile, Umsatz und Ertrag
>>> geht und auch auf den Social-Media-Plattformen wie Twitter oder
>>> Facebook (über Werbung) Milliarden eingenommen werden, verteidigen nun
>>> auch Verleger ihre und damit die Interessen ihrer Mitarbeiterinnen und
>>> Mitarbeiter."
>>>
>> http://www.nzz.ch/nachrichten/kultur/medien/verlage_haben_anrecht_auf_besseren_schutz_1.7232236.html
>>>
>>> I think it would be great if Wikimedia CH reacts on such a statement.
>>>
>>> Best
>>> Daniel
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> http://wikimedia.ch Wikimedia CH website
>>> Wikimediach-l mailing list
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediach-l
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> http://wikimedia.ch Wikimedia CH website
>> Wikimediach-l mailing list
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediach-l
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> http://wikimedia.ch Wikimedia CH website
> Wikimediach-l mailing list
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediach-l
>


_______________________________________________
http://wikimedia.ch Wikimedia CH website
Wikimediach-l mailing list
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediach-l

Antwort per Email an