Thomas Dalton wrote: > 2009/3/3 Erik Moeller <e...@wikimedia.org>: > >> Hello all, >> >> as some of you may have seen, I've run a small survey over the >> weekend, scattered via a 5% site-notice on the English Wikipedia for >> signed in users. The result is a self-selected sample of authors. I'll >> publish the full anonymous raw data later this week, and I also intend >> to run it on the German Wikipedia to get some comparative data. Please >> note that I'll probably turn off the English version before doing so, >> so if you feel you still want to take the survey yourself, you can do >> so at: http://survey.wikimedia.org/index.php?sid=69514 >> > > Excellent. Getting some idea of community opinion is very important. > However, has anyone carried out my suggestion of consulting with the > CC lawyers? They wrote the license, so their interpretation of it is > highly relevant. Community opinion is only relevant within the bounds > of what is acceptable under the license. >
While there is nothing I disagree logically with in your statement; I do think the last sentence is only acceptable if taken in the absolute. Certainly that is an "utmost" framework that cannot be transgressed. But there are many, many, many things clearly and unambiguously acceptable within hte bounds of the license, which are clearly unacceptable for our mission. There is no reason for us to stretch the license "as far as it can go". Yours, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
