On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 8:49 AM, Nikola Smolenski wrote:
>
> I don't know if they commonly do it but at least at
> http://amazon.decenturl.com/amazon.com-prehistoric-europe they openly
> say it's from Wikipedia.
>
And still by reading that review you get the impression that they're
building upon w
Hoi,
As long as the books give sufficient indication that they are from
Wikipedia, as long as the license requirement is met, this gentlemen is
welcome to ask as much as people are willing to pay. If anything this is
EXACTLY something that we can do as well. The German Verein did a good job a
few y
2009/8/13 David Goodman :
> I would be exceedingly uncomfortable with us organizing a negative
> campaign against any publisher not actually violating our copyright.
> . A factual campaign, providing information is another matter. It
> would be entirely appropriate for individuals, even in a some
>
> As long as the books give sufficient indication that they are from
> Wikipedia, ...
Inside the book -- yes, plenty of indication about copying. But nothing to
warn you before you buy. People are buying these books tricked into thinking
it's an original content.
___
2009/8/14 Renata St :
>> As long as the books give sufficient indication that they are from
>> Wikipedia, ...
> Inside the book -- yes, plenty of indication about copying. But nothing to
> warn you before you buy. People are buying these books tricked into thinking
> it's an original content.
Y
Our logo competitions have landed us such excellent trademarks as the
puzzle globe, the WMF logo and the MediaWiki flower. But most entries
are an excellent demonstration of why graphic designers are paid
money.
This one did make the b3ta newsletter, though. Could be a very
profitable bit of visua
>
> Another alternative might be for Wikimedians to put together a company
> that would sell similar books to the public at cost, perhaps on a print
> on demand basis so as to get the latest versions. Article selection
> might be the same, and they could even use identical titles for each
> book,
David Gerard wrote:
> Our logo competitions have landed us such excellent trademarks as the
> puzzle globe, the WMF logo and the MediaWiki flower. But most entries
> are an excellent demonstration of why graphic designers are paid
> money.
>
>
Sigh. Of course you know, Bob, the MediaWiki flower
>
> >> As long as the books give sufficient indication that they are from
> >> Wikipedia, ...
>
> > Inside the book -- yes, plenty of indication about copying. But nothing
> to
> > warn you before you buy. People are buying these books tricked into
> thinking
> > it's an original content.
>
> Yuh.
2009/8/14 Jussi-Ville Heiskanen :
> David Gerard wrote:
>> Our logo competitions have landed us such excellent trademarks as the
>> puzzle globe, the WMF logo and the MediaWiki flower. But most entries
>> are an excellent demonstration of why graphic designers are paid
>> money.
> Sigh. Of course
2009/8/14 Renata St :
>> > Inside the book -- yes, plenty of indication about copying. But nothing
>> to
>> > warn you before you buy. People are buying these books tricked into
>> thinking
>> > it's an original content.
>> Yuh. Point it out in reviews etc.
> Exactly, except that there are 2000
Wikimedia France and the Wikimedia Foundation are currently
considering the idea of a multimedia-focused workshop and planning
event to take place in October 2009. Rather than an open community
conference like Wikimania, this would be a workshop targeting skilled
practitioners who want to help tran
Lol, Goatse!
- b.
Friday, August 14, 2009, 12:08:01 PM, David Gerard wrote:
DG> Our logo competitions have landed us such excellent trademarks as the
DG> puzzle globe, the WMF logo and the MediaWiki flower. But most entries
DG> are an excellent demonstration of why graphic designers are paid
DG>
**
____ _ __ _
/ / /\ \ (_) | _(_)___(_)_ __ ___
\ \/ \/ / | |/ / |_ / | '_ \ / _ \
\ /\ /| | <| |/ /| | | | | __/
\/ \/ |_|_|\_\_/___|_|_| |_|\___|
.org
Year: 2009 Week: 3
David Gerard wrote:
> 2009/8/14 Jussi-Ville Heiskanen :
>
>
>> Sigh. Of course you know, Bob, the MediaWiki flower isn't
>> a trademark or anything remotely of the sort "owned" or
>> even claimed in other than authorship fashion by anyone.
>>
>
>
> You're probably wrong there, actually -
Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Cox, Serita wrote:
>
>> Google's new search engine, Caffeine, is supposedly kicking Wikipedia
>> entries further down results page. Thoughts? Comments?
>>
> So what? Wikipedia's goal isn't to get high search rankings. It's to
> be a u
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 11:25 AM, Jussi-Ville
Heiskanen wrote:
> David Gerard wrote:
>> 2009/8/14 Jussi-Ville Heiskanen :
>>
>>
>>> Sigh. Of course you know, Bob, the MediaWiki flower isn't
>>> a trademark or anything remotely of the sort "owned" or
>>> even claimed in other than authorship fashion
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Ray Saintonge wrote:
> Aryeh Gregor wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Cox, Serita
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Google's new search engine, Caffeine, is supposedly kicking Wikipedia
>>> entries further down results page. Thoughts? Comments?
>>>
>> So what? Wikipedia's
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 1:20 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> 2009/8/14 Renata St :
>
> >> > Inside the book -- yes, plenty of indication about copying. But
> nothing
> >> to
> >> > warn you before you buy. People are buying these books tricked into
> >> thinking
> >> > it's an original content.
>
> >>
When you're competing with your own fans, you're ... in trouble.
http://www.tampabay.com/news/article1027680.ece
- d.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
2009/8/14 Robert Rohde :
> In the specific case of "Bob the flower", the bigger problem is that
> no one has been actively defending its use as a trademark. The more
> examples of use there are unaffiliated with Mediawiki, the more
> difficult it would be to assert that it is a trademark represen
> When you're competing with your own fans, you're ... in trouble.
>
> http://www.tampabay.com/news/article1027680.ece
>
>
> - d.
Heh, but is there any basis whatever that the events occurring a football
game are of social or education value?
Fred
__
2009/8/14 Fred Bauder :
>> When you're competing with your own fans, you're ... in trouble.
>> http://www.tampabay.com/news/article1027680.ece
> Heh, but is there any basis whatever that the events occurring a football
> game are of social or education value?
Historical, frequently. I believe o
They are happy with fans exactly insofar as they yield profit. But they also
need to protect what they get from other fans. Hence no sharing unless it
leads to more total spending. If they could figure out how to charge fans
for remembering the game (or the logo or the mascot or the faces of their
David Gerard wrote:
> 2009/8/14 Fred Bauder :
>
>>> When you're competing with your own fans, you're ... in trouble.
>>> http://www.tampabay.com/news/article1027680.ece
>>>
>> Heh, but is there any basis whatever that the events occurring a football
>> game are of social or education valu
Renata St wrote:
> I am not objecting to publishing Wikipedia. If someone wants to put an
> honest effort into producing Wikipedia CDs/DVDs/books -- more power to them.
> But please label in big clear letters "copied from Wikipedia" on the cover
> for everyone to see. I know German Wikipedia was pu
The training is typically an apprenticeship under the senior
cataloging librarians.
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 1:48 AM, Samuel Klein wrote:
> DGG, I appreciate your points. Would we be so motivated by this
> thread if it weren
> 2009/8/14 Fred Bauder :
>
>>> When you're competing with your own fans, you're ... in trouble.
>>> http://www.tampabay.com/news/article1027680.ece
>
>> Heh, but is there any basis whatever that the events occurring a
>> football
>> game are of social or education value?
>
>
> Historical, frequent
arg, I did not lay that connection.. thanks for doing that and imprinting it
in my head (NOT)... :(
2009/8/14
> Lol, Goatse!
>
> - b.
>
> Friday, August 14, 2009, 12:08:01 PM, David Gerard wrote:
>
> DG> Our logo competitions have landed us such excellent trademarks as the
> DG> puzzle globe, th
> The training is typically an apprenticeship under the senior...
To my regret training/apprenticeship does not fit to "everyone
can...", "be bold!" set of wikimedia slogans/motto.
As to me I would stand behind (vote for) training and apprenticeship.
On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 12:23 AM, David Goodm
Exactly. That is why Wikipedia is an inappropriate place for this
project. It lacks sufficient stability. I think Wikipedia should go on
being what it is, an almost completely open place,and projects which
need disciplined long term expertise should be organized separately.
Wikipedia is a wonderful
31 matches
Mail list logo
