Mailing List Archive: Wikipedia: Foundation

New wiki creation

1 2

View All

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

erik at wikimedia

Apr 30, 2008, 9:52 AM

Post #1 of 29 (263 views)
Permalink

New wiki creation

We're still waiting for the FDL 1.3. Since there's been no resolution
within the timeframe we hoped for, we're going to re-allow the
creation of new Wikimedia wikis. To make sure that we can safely
transition to CC-BY-SA, we're going to dual-license them under
CC-BY-SA 3.0:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode

We may remove this dual-licensing clause later, depending on what the
community decides with regard to licensing of existing and new wikis
based on the options that the FDL 1.3 will provide. This
dual-licensing of new wikis is purely intended to make sure that we
have the _option_ to transition these wikis to CC-BY-SA 3.0 (or later)
if we choose to.

--
Erik Möller
Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

gerard.meijssen at gmail

Apr 30, 2008, 10:02 AM

Post #2 of 29 (257 views)
Permalink

Re: New wiki creation [In reply to]

Hoi,
Thank you. Sad to hear that the hoped for progress did not materialise...

Would you be so kind to make sure that the projects that have been waiting
for such an excessively long time are now created ? This is a good moment to
reassess the projects that are ready / almost ready again.
Thanks,
Gerard

On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 6:52 PM, Erik Moeller <erik[at]wikimedia.org> wrote:

> We're still waiting for the FDL 1.3. Since there's been no resolution
> within the timeframe we hoped for, we're going to re-allow the
> creation of new Wikimedia wikis. To make sure that we can safely
> transition to CC-BY-SA, we're going to dual-license them under
> CC-BY-SA 3.0:
>
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode
>
> We may remove this dual-licensing clause later, depending on what the
> community decides with regard to licensing of existing and new wikis
> based on the options that the FDL 1.3 will provide. This
> dual-licensing of new wikis is purely intended to make sure that we
> have the _option_ to transition these wikis to CC-BY-SA 3.0 (or later)
> if we choose to.
>
> --
> Erik MÃ¶ller
> Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation
>
> Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

rarohde at gmail

Apr 30, 2008, 10:10 AM

Post #3 of 29 (258 views)
Permalink

Re: New wiki creation [In reply to]

Any chance you can provide some updated insight on when 1.3 might appear?

-Robert Rohde

On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 9:52 AM, Erik Moeller <erik[at]wikimedia.org> wrote:

> We're still waiting for the FDL 1.3. Since there's been no resolution
> within the timeframe we hoped for, we're going to re-allow the
> creation of new Wikimedia wikis. To make sure that we can safely
> transition to CC-BY-SA, we're going to dual-license them under
> CC-BY-SA 3.0:
>
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode
>
> We may remove this dual-licensing clause later, depending on what the
> community decides with regard to licensing of existing and new wikis
> based on the options that the FDL 1.3 will provide. This
> dual-licensing of new wikis is purely intended to make sure that we
> have the _option_ to transition these wikis to CC-BY-SA 3.0 (or later)
> if we choose to.
>
> --
> Erik Möller
> Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation
>
> Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

chiesa.marco at gmail

Apr 30, 2008, 10:30 AM

Post #4 of 29 (256 views)
Permalink

Re: New wiki creation [In reply to]

Erik Moeller ha scritto:
> We're still waiting for the FDL 1.3. Since there's been no resolution
> within the timeframe we hoped for, we're going to re-allow the
> creation of new Wikimedia wikis. To make sure that we can safely
> transition to CC-BY-SA, we're going to dual-license them under
> CC-BY-SA 3.0:
>
Won't this prevent writing articles translated from GFDL-only wikis? If
A licenses a text under GFDL, you cannot license a derivative under
cc-by-sa. And if we can transition the "old" GFDL-only wikis, why can't
we transition the new ones if we start them GFDL-only?

Cruccone

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

erik at wikimedia

Apr 30, 2008, 10:32 AM

Post #5 of 29 (255 views)
Permalink

Re: New wiki creation [In reply to]

2008/4/30 Robert Rohde <rarohde[at]gmail.com>:
> Any chance you can provide some updated insight on when 1.3 might appear?

I'm afraid not - it seems to be in the "it'll be done when it's done" stage
--
Erik Möller
Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

effeietsanders at gmail

Apr 30, 2008, 10:35 AM

Post #6 of 29 (256 views)
Permalink

Re: New wiki creation [In reply to]

2008/4/30, Marco Chiesa <chiesa.marco[at]gmail.com>:
> Erik Moeller ha scritto:
>
> > We're still waiting for the FDL 1.3. Since there's been no resolution
> > within the timeframe we hoped for, we're going to re-allow the
> > creation of new Wikimedia wikis. To make sure that we can safely
> > transition to CC-BY-SA, we're going to dual-license them under
> > CC-BY-SA 3.0:
> >
>
> Won't this prevent writing articles translated from GFDL-only wikis? If
> A licenses a text under GFDL, you cannot license a derivative under
> cc-by-sa. And if we can transition the "old" GFDL-only wikis, why can't
> we transition the new ones if we start them GFDL-only?
>
> Cruccone
>
>
Same thought occurred to me. NL Wikibooks is also dual licensed, and
it is with that respect a small pain in the ass. I think that
especially for new wiki's with brand new users this is not very
practical, as they have already trouble enough to understand what a
free license is at all... (and now they'll be told that they can't
even translate articles from other Wikipediae, but they can translate
from french to english? :S)

I think it would be good if this would be reconsidered if this
argument did not come up yet.

BR, Lodewijk

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

erik at wikimedia

Apr 30, 2008, 10:50 AM

Post #7 of 29 (256 views)
Permalink

Re: New wiki creation [In reply to]

2008/4/30 effe iets anders <effeietsanders[at]gmail.com>:
> Same thought occurred to me. NL Wikibooks is also dual licensed, and
> it is with that respect a small pain in the ass.

Under the construction of the FDL 1.3 we've seen, it might be feasible
to have a clause which amounts to "I also agree to licensing my edits
under CC-BY-SA 3.0 in the event that this wiki will be migrated to
CC-BY-SA 3.0 in the future". Mike, jump in if you disagree, but that
kind of agreement would seem sufficient to me to ensure that content
can be safely migrated in the future.

The only point here is to not block a clean future migration of new wikis.
--
Erik Möller
Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

mgodwin at wikimedia

Apr 30, 2008, 11:04 AM

Post #8 of 29 (256 views)
Permalink

Re: New wiki creation [In reply to]

I think it's important, at least at this phase, to expressly
communicate to everyone that CC-BY-SA 3.0 includes "later versions of
this license" clause. I just want to foreclose the possibility that
someone will come along later and say "I agreed to 3.0, but I don't
like 3.1."

--Mike

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

effeietsanders at gmail

Apr 30, 2008, 11:09 AM

Post #9 of 29 (256 views)
Permalink

Re: New wiki creation [In reply to]

> Under the construction of the FDL 1.3 we've seen, it might be feasible
> to have a clause which amounts to "I also agree to licensing my edits
> under CC-BY-SA 3.0 in the event that this wiki will be migrated to
> CC-BY-SA 3.0 in the future". Mike, jump in if you disagree, but that
> kind of agreement would seem sufficient to me to ensure that content
> can be safely migrated in the future.
>
> The only point here is to not block a clean future migration of new wikis.
>
> --

Of course IANAL and all, but it sounds to me like you want to license
changes (translations) and not versions. That sounds quite complicated
to me. To get things clear, please let's take an example.

Say I am a 64 year old woman from the Qurinyi tribe in middle Africa
(dont look it up, it does not exist). And I just want to start the
Qurinyi Wikipedia with my recent skills to type together with my
friends on the new computers we just got. I speak well French, so a
logical start would be to start translating major articles at least
partially from French.

Would it be OK to do that in the new situation? Strictly speaking,
there is still (GFDL) copyright of the original French authors on the
text, but on the original there is no CC-BY-SA license. Am I or am I
not allowed to add a CC-BY-SA here? And if I would only say that my
part was cc-by-sa, how can I identify what is mine then?

Thanks for clarifying. If it is all ok, sure, no problem for me. I
just would like things not get extra complicated for people in these
new wiki's :)

Best regards,

Lodewijk

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

erik at wikimedia

Apr 30, 2008, 11:17 AM

Post #10 of 29 (255 views)
Permalink

Re: New wiki creation [In reply to]

2008/4/30 effe iets anders <effeietsanders[at]gmail.com>:
> Would it be OK to do that in the new situation? Strictly speaking,
> there is still (GFDL) copyright of the original French authors on the
> text, but on the original there is no CC-BY-SA license. Am I or am I
> not allowed to add a CC-BY-SA here? And if I would only say that my
> part was cc-by-sa, how can I identify what is mine then?
>
> Thanks for clarifying. If it is all ok, sure, no problem for me. I
> just would like things not get extra complicated for people in these
> new wiki's :)

Yes, that would work under the new clause, provided that all the
original translated content is migrated at the same time. This is the
only scenario we're really exploring, anyway: Either we'll switch the
Wikimedia projects to CC-BY-SA at some point, or we won't.

I've drafted up this clause at the following URL:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Licensing_clause_for_new_wikis

To keep things simple, I suggest that we use this version for all new wikis.
--
Erik Möller
Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

pathoschild at gmail

Apr 30, 2008, 11:50 AM

Post #11 of 29 (256 views)
Permalink

Re: New wiki creation [In reply to]

Erik Moeller <erik[at]wikimedia.org> wrote:
> To make sure that we can safely transition to CC-BY-SA, we're going
> to dual-license them under CC-BY-SA 3.0:

I'm not sure this is possible. All approved wikis already have an
extensive body of articles in the Incubator licensed under the GFDL. I
think these articles cannot be relicensed under a dual-license until
we transition to GFDL 1.3.

If this is correct, we can only dual-license new wikis if we purge all
their GFDL-only work for the last several months, or wait until GFDL
1.3 is released.

--
Yours cordially,
Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

erik at wikimedia

Apr 30, 2008, 11:55 AM

Post #12 of 29 (256 views)
Permalink

Re: New wiki creation [In reply to]

2008/4/30 Jesse Martin (Pathoschild) <pathoschild[at]gmail.com>:
> I'm not sure this is possible. All approved wikis already have an
> extensive body of articles in the Incubator licensed under the GFDL.

Yes, this is understood. Under the clause I proposed in response to
effe, online at:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Licensing_clause_for_new_wikis
this will not be a problem. All the clause requires is that
contributors commit to licensing their edits under CC-BY-SA in the
event that the existing wiki content can be safely migrated, which in
part depends on the FDL 1.3.

--
Erik Möller
Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

node.ue at gmail

Apr 30, 2008, 11:59 AM

Post #13 of 29 (255 views)
Permalink

Re: New wiki creation [In reply to]

Like Arcosanti? Sorry, but that is unacceptable as a phase for
something people are waiting for. If the FSF expects to continue to be
taken seriously by the wider community, they need to have the ability
to set deadlines for themselves and more importantly to meet them.

Mark

2008/4/30 Erik Moeller <erik[at]wikimedia.org>:
> 2008/4/30 Robert Rohde <rarohde[at]gmail.com>:
>
> > Any chance you can provide some updated insight on when 1.3 might appear?
>
> I'm afraid not - it seems to be in the "it'll be done when it's done" stage
> --
>
>
> Erik Möller
> Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation
>
> Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

gerard.meijssen at gmail

Apr 30, 2008, 12:01 PM

Post #14 of 29 (256 views)
Permalink

Re: New wiki creation [In reply to]

Hoi,
It has been discussed already a long time that a new project is NOT a tabula
rasa. Content is to be moved from the Incubator. The Incubator IS GFDL
licensed. What I now understand is that the existing contributors are to
re-license their content .... I think this is a sad moment because
everything becomes even more muddled. What I hope for is that these projects
are created preferably today.
Thanks,
GerardM

On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 8:55 PM, Erik Moeller <erik[at]wikimedia.org> wrote:

> 2008/4/30 Jesse Martin (Pathoschild) <pathoschild[at]gmail.com>:
> > I'm not sure this is possible. All approved wikis already have an
> > extensive body of articles in the Incubator licensed under the GFDL.
>
> Yes, this is understood. Under the clause I proposed in response to
> effe, online at:
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Licensing_clause_for_new_wikis
> this will not be a problem. All the clause requires is that
> contributors commit to licensing their edits under CC-BY-SA in the
> event that the existing wiki content can be safely migrated, which in
> part depends on the FDL 1.3.
>
> --
> Erik MÃ¶ller
> Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation
>
> Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

pathoschild at gmail

Apr 30, 2008, 12:34 PM

Post #15 of 29 (256 views)
Permalink

Re: New wiki creation [In reply to]

Erik Moeller <erik[at]wikimedia.org> wrote:
> All the clause requires is that contributors commit to licensing their
> edits under CC-BY-SA in the event that the existing wiki content
> can be safely migrated, which in part depends on the FDL 1.3.

This is difficult. For example, the Extremaduran Wikipedia test
project has been edited by 34 users, some of which are inactive.
<http://tools.wikimedia.de/~pathoschild/ls-testanalysis/?prefix=wp/ext>

If we cannot contact any of these users (or they refuse to relicense),
the only choice I see is between purging all subsequent versions of
articles they edited, or waiting for FDL 1.3 with its migration
clause. It's a choice between a messy time-intensive migration, or a
probably lengthy wait.

If possible, it would be much better to leave the content under their
current licensing. This would allow us to create the wikis
immediately, and migrate them to a hypothetical dual-licensing on
equal grounds with other wikis. Approved wikis today have more content
than many of our existing domains.

--
Yours cordially,
Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

erik at wikimedia

Apr 30, 2008, 3:18 PM

Post #16 of 29 (242 views)
Permalink

Re: New wiki creation [In reply to]

2008/4/30 Jesse Martin (Pathoschild) <pathoschild[at]gmail.com>:
> This is difficult. For example, the Extremaduran Wikipedia test
> project has been edited by 34 users, some of which are inactive.
> <http://tools.wikimedia.de/~pathoschild/ls-testanalysis/?prefix=wp/ext>

This won't be necessary. Existing incubator content _can_ remain under
FDL only. New edits to the wikis that are being set up right now have
to have the "will agree to the possibility of migration" clause.
--
Erik Möller
Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

effeietsanders at gmail

Apr 30, 2008, 3:25 PM

Post #17 of 29 (242 views)
Permalink

Re: New wiki creation [In reply to]

So, why does this African woman of 67 have t agree to this, and not
all projects? Because essentially, there seems to me no big
difference? Why can't we just say the same for enwiki then? There also
all content is under FDL (like that new wiki with incubator content).
Just on a somewhat larger scale?

Lodewijk

2008/5/1, Erik Moeller <erik[at]wikimedia.org>:
> 2008/4/30 Jesse Martin (Pathoschild) <pathoschild[at]gmail.com>:
>
> > This is difficult. For example, the Extremaduran Wikipedia test
> > project has been edited by 34 users, some of which are inactive.
> > <http://tools.wikimedia.de/~pathoschild/ls-testanalysis/?prefix=wp/ext>
>
>
> This won't be necessary. Existing incubator content _can_ remain under
> FDL only. New edits to the wikis that are being set up right now have
> to have the "will agree to the possibility of migration" clause.
>
> --
> Erik Möller
> Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation
>
> Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

millosh at gmail

Apr 30, 2008, 3:27 PM

Post #18 of 29 (242 views)
Permalink

Re: New wiki creation [In reply to]

On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 12:18 AM, Erik Moeller <erik[at]wikimedia.org> wrote:
> 2008/4/30 Jesse Martin (Pathoschild) <pathoschild[at]gmail.com>:
>
> > This is difficult. For example, the Extremaduran Wikipedia test
> > project has been edited by 34 users, some of which are inactive.
> > <http://tools.wikimedia.de/~pathoschild/ls-testanalysis/?prefix=wp/ext>
>
> This won't be necessary. Existing incubator content _can_ remain under
> FDL only. New edits to the wikis that are being set up right now have
> to have the "will agree to the possibility of migration" clause.

Erik, I needed a lot of time to understand what are you saying. So,
I'll try to explain it to others:

A clause for migration from GFDL 1.3 to CC-BY-SA 3.x/whatever will be
applied only to wikis started before some date. This date is obviously
before the present.

So, this applies to all existing projects, except to new ones; which
includes Incubator, too.

Contributors should *state* that their work may be used under the
terms under CC-BY-SA 3.0 (or any later) *in the case* of switching
from GFDL to CC-BY-SA.

This means that they are able to freely translate anything from any
GFDL project, as well as the project will be licensed under GFDL until
the migration.

I hope that I explained the main part of misunderstanding.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

erik at wikimedia

Apr 30, 2008, 3:29 PM

Post #19 of 29 (242 views)
Permalink

Re: New wiki creation [In reply to]

2008/4/30 effe iets anders <effeietsanders[at]gmail.com>:
> So, why does this African woman of 67 have t agree to this, and not
> all projects?

That's because of the way the FDL 1.3 drafts we've seen address the
migration question.
--
Erik Möller
Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

millosh at gmail

Apr 30, 2008, 3:38 PM

Post #20 of 29 (242 views)
Permalink

Re: New wiki creation [In reply to]

On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 12:29 AM, Erik Moeller <erik[at]wikimedia.org> wrote:
> 2008/4/30 effe iets anders <effeietsanders[at]gmail.com>:
>
> > So, why does this African woman of 67 have t agree to this, and not
> > all projects?
>
> That's because of the way the FDL 1.3 drafts we've seen address the
> migration question.

BTW, date of creation of the project is a well known migration clause,
known from GFDL 2.0 drafts. I don't see a reason for mystification of
that.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

chiesa.marco at gmail

Apr 30, 2008, 4:10 PM

Post #21 of 29 (242 views)
Permalink

Re: New wiki creation [In reply to]

Erik Moeller ha scritto:
> This won't be necessary. Existing incubator content _can_ remain under
> FDL only. New edits to the wikis that are being set up right now have
> to have the "will agree to the possibility of migration" clause.
>
Does it mean that the new wikis will have some content which is
GFDL-only (what was created or derives from something created elsewhere)
and some content which is doubly licensed? Or that we just double
license everything because shortly it will be legal to do so? And BTW, I
thought contents were licensed in GFDL, not projects. If today I write
something (releasing under GFDL 1.2 or later) on project A created last
year or on project B created today, how is it possible that from project
A you can do GFDL 1.2 -> GFDL 1.3 -> cc-by-sa-3.0 while on project B you
can't, when you have released the same text under the same licence?
Cruccone

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

millosh at gmail

Apr 30, 2008, 4:10 PM

Post #22 of 29 (242 views)
Permalink

Re: New wiki creation [In reply to]

On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 12:27 AM, Milos Rancic <millosh[at]gmail.com> wrote:
> So, this applies to all existing projects, except to new ones; which
> includes Incubator, too.

This applies to Incubator, too (I see that I was not so clear in wording).

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

millosh at gmail

Apr 30, 2008, 4:18 PM

Post #23 of 29 (242 views)
Permalink

Re: New wiki creation [In reply to]

On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 1:10 AM, Marco Chiesa <chiesa.marco[at]gmail.com> wrote:
> Erik Moeller ha scritto:
>
> > This won't be necessary. Existing incubator content _can_ remain under
> > FDL only. New edits to the wikis that are being set up right now have
> > to have the "will agree to the possibility of migration" clause.
> >
> Does it mean that the new wikis will have some content which is
> GFDL-only (what was created or derives from something created elsewhere)
> and some content which is doubly licensed? Or that we just double
> license everything because shortly it will be legal to do so? And BTW, I
> thought contents were licensed in GFDL, not projects. If today I write
> something (releasing under GFDL 1.2 or later) on project A created last
> year or on project B created today, how is it possible that from project
> A you can do GFDL 1.2 -> GFDL 1.3 -> cc-by-sa-3.0 while on project B you
> can't, when you have released the same text under the same licence?
> Cruccone

All wikis will be GFDL-only. Contributors of new wikis (including any
of "older" Wikimedians) just need to agree that their work may be used
under CC-BY-SA in the case of the license migration.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

millosh at gmail

Apr 30, 2008, 4:18 PM

Post #24 of 29 (241 views)
Permalink

Re: New wiki creation [In reply to]

thomas.dalton at gmail

Apr 30, 2008, 4:20 PM

Post #25 of 29 (223 views)
Permalink

Re: New wiki creation [In reply to]

> Does it mean that the new wikis will have some content which is
> GFDL-only (what was created or derives from something created elsewhere)
> and some content which is doubly licensed?

As I understand it, yes. Which seems extremely confusing, and likely
to cause more problems than it solves. The only explanation for this
very strange decision that I can see if that the new license has an
arbitrary date in it that pre-dates the actual publication of the
license. If that's the case, then the correct action for the WMF is to
point out to the people writing the license how stupid this is, rather
than trying to cater to such a stupid clause.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

1 2

View All

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact lists@gossamer-threads.com