On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 8:48 AM, Jay Walsh wrote:
> Today the Wikimedia Foundation posted an important update on how the Stop
> Online Piracy Act (SOPA) legislation being considered in DC this week
> threatens an open and free web, and particularly how it threatens Wikipedia.
>
> The post is autho
Today the Wikimedia Foundation posted an important update on how the Stop
Online Piracy Act (SOPA) legislation being considered in DC this week
threatens an open and free web, and particularly how it threatens Wikipedia.
The post is authored by WMF's General Counsel, Geoff Brigham, and can be
foun
Sorry about the confusion. I was talking most recently about the GFDL,
which does not mention moral rights. CC-BY-SA does mention moral rights
(to state that it does not affect them). Interestingly, the U.S. port of
the CC-BY-SA license does not include a disclaimer about moral rights,
but this
The first link to the blog is not working. Here's one that works:
http://blog.wikimedia.org/2011/12/13/help-test-the-first-visual-editor-developer-prototype/
//Abbas.
> From: liamwy...@gmail.com
> Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 04:34:56 +
> To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: [Foundation
For those who've not seen the announcement, the WMF tech team have launched
the first prototype of the visual editor, "perhaps the most challenging
technical project ever undertaken in the history of MediaWiki
development.":
http://blog.wikimedia.org/2011/12/13/help-test-the-first-visual-editor-dev
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 11:37 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote:
> On 12/13/11 12:14 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
>> Using an URL does allow the semblance of attribution, but does not
>> fulfil the legal requirements of moral rights. I find it mildly
>> distasteful, that
>> other jurisdictions laws are r
On 13/12/11 02:55, David Gerard wrote:
> On 12 December 2011 15:26, K. Peachey wrote:
>
>> It's been a requested feature for a while, Someone finally got around
>> to writing it (I believe it needed the Improved metadata handling
>> backend first) and implementing it, It wasn't a sudden "oh lets
On 13/12/11 01:36, Teofilo wrote:
> Let us stop asking users to individually tag every wrong picture! Let
> us have some developers create a tool to find wrong pictures and
> rotate them back to their original orientation!
We could make a list of all images with EXIF rotation. I'm not sure
how you
Not really, in the UK at least. However this is a poor example; it's
important to note that UK moral rights legislation isn't
*actually*representative. we fail to comply with the Berne Convention
on attribution,
insofar as we don't mandate it except when the author makes clear he wants
it. It's als
On 12/13/11 12:14 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
> Using an URL does allow the semblance of attribution, but does not
> fulfil the legal requirements of moral rights. I find it mildly
> distasteful, that
> other jurisdictions laws are referred to as "exceptions for various cases",
> when CC itsel
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 9:46 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote:
> [...] Using a URL allows attribution without
> creating a hardship for the reuser. This has the added benefit of
> allowing us to enforce our terms firmly and consistantly, rather than
> carving out exceptions for various cases and having inc
On 12/13/11 9:02 AM, geni wrote:
> Actually it is extremely unclear why we switched. There are in fact a
> number of re-users that managed to deal with the attribution issue in
> paper form.
It can often be done on paper (and easily on the web), but it's not very
convenient for audio, i.e. spok
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 05:57:02AM +, Randall Britten wrote:
> One more vote from me for a collaborative Wikipedia hosting: In order to
> future proof Wikimedia, an even more distributed architecture is needed.
> This would allow another way to contribute to the Wikimedia effort: the
> dona
Opinion essay: Wikipedia in Academe â and ''vice versa''
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2011-12-12/Opinion_essay
News and notes: Research project banner ads run afoul of community
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2011-12-12/News_and_notes
In t
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 9:52 PM, David Richfield
wrote:
> What effect would a less aggressive tone have had? Would you have
> been more likely to convince your audience? less likely to alienate
> people?
It's a fair point. I think part of the problem is that people are
feeling that reasonable,
On 12 December 2011 20:22, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> On 12 December 2011 20:05, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
>We switched to
> the current license terms because we realised requiring re-users to
> credit every single person that made a non-trivial edit to the page
> was impractical and hardly any re-us
On 12 December 2011 20:54, Ryan Kaldari wrote:
> I suppose we could add a disclaimer saying that the Terms of Use do not
> affect the editor's moral rights, although this would be a bit redundant
> since the CC-BY-SA license already states this.
>
> Ryan Kaldari
The problem is that the intent is
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote:
> I suppose we could add a disclaimer saying that the Terms of Use do not
> affect the editor's moral rights, although this would be a bit redundant
> since the CC-BY-SA license already states this.
It may be redundant in the legal text, but
18 matches
Mail list logo
