The Cunctator writes:
> No, this is a profoundly stupid decision that has no logical sense. A > "free" > license is a copyright license. > The point bears repeating (over and over again, if necessary). The free licenses we use are in fact quite demanding with regard to downstream uses. And our purpose in protecting the Wikimedia trademarks is partly to make sure that downstream reusers stick to the free licenses under which we distribute free content. By the way, check out <http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volvo>. I hope no one thinks Swedish Wikipedians (or anyone else) is free to reuse the Volvo logo without a license. --Mike _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
