Re: [Wikimedia-l] a second commons, prevent cease and desist business

[Rogol Domedonfors]

James, that's very helpful and I see at least one book on that list that
violates the licence, and hence breaches my copyright, in content that I
wrote.  What's the best way forward?  Should  the WMF represent the
community by engaging directly with the company responsible?  Or should it
coordinate and advise individual contributors making numerous individual
approaches?  Or should it do nothing?  What's best?

"Rogol"

On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 2:39 AM, James Heilman  wrote:

> Rupert here is a list of 213,000 books that are based on Wikipedia without
> proper attribution.
>
> https://www.google.ca/search?tbm=bks&hl=en&q=%22CTI+Reviews%22
>
> James
>
> On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 3:47 AM, David Gerard  wrote:
>
> > This thread is notably long on hypothetical and meta-level discussions
> > and very short on concrete examples of the supposedly problematic
> > uploads under discussion. What are the generally accepted examples of
> > what we're actually talking about here?
> >
> >
> > - d.
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
>
>
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
>
> The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [Wikimedia Announcements] [PRESS RELEASE] Wikimedia community in Iraq partners with Asiacell to bring Wikipedia to nearly 12 million subscribers free of mobile data charges

[James Heilman]

This is wonderful news. Expecially the fact that they can edit for free.
Congrats to all involved :-)

James

On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Pine W  wrote:

> Forwarding.
>
> Pine
>
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Samantha Lien 
> Date: Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:28 AM
> Subject: [Wikimedia Announcements] [PRESS RELEASE] Wikimedia community in
> Iraq partners with Asiacell to bring Wikipedia to nearly 12 million
> subscribers free of mobile data charges
> To: press-rele...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
>
> This press release is also available online here:
>
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_releases/
> Wikimedia_community_in_Iraq_partners_with_Asiacell_to_
> bring_Wikipedia_to_nearly_12_million_subscribers_free_of_
> mobile_data_charges
>
> *Wikimedia community in Iraq partners with Asiacell to bring Wikipedia to
> nearly 12 million subscribers free of mobile data charges*
>
> *Mobile data fees waived for Asiacell customers in Iraq to access
> Wikipedia, a free collection of knowledge available in nearly 300
> languages*
>
> (Barcelona, Spain) February 28th, 2017 -- Today, Wikimedia community
> members in Iraq, the Wikimedia Foundation, and Asiacell, one of Iraq’s
> largest mobile operators, announced a new partnership to provide access to
> Wikipedia free of mobile data charges to Asiacell’s nearly 12 million
> subscribers in Iraq. The partnership was announced today at a press event
> hosted by Ooredoo during Mobile World Congress 2017.
>
> The partnership, developed in large part by Iraqi volunteer editor and
> Asiacell employee, Sarmad Saeed Yaseen, marks the first Wikipedia Zero
> program in Iraq. The program, overseen by the nonprofit Wikimedia
> Foundation, addresses one of the greatest barriers to internet access
> globally: affordability. In a recent phone survey in Iraq led by the
> Wikimedia Foundation, roughly 80% of surveyed participants reported that
> mobile data costs limited their use of the internet. About 33% of
> participants also reported rarely or never being able to find online
> content in their preferred language.
>
> Through the Wikipedia Zero
>  program, mobile data
> fees are waived for subscribers of participating mobile operators so that
> they may read and edit Wikipedia without using any of their mobile data.
>
> Sarmad, who is part of a community of local volunteer Wikipedia editors in
> Iraq, started the partnership to extend access to knowledge in his home
> country of Iraq. Together, he and his wife, Ravan Jaafar Altaie, have been
> active editors (or Wikipedians) since 2008.
>
> “I've always believed that it is better to light a candle than curse the
> darkness, so I decided to volunteer in Wikipedia to provide knowledge for
> free to my people in their own language,” said Sarmad Saeed Yaseen. “When I
> was first introduced to Wikipedia Zero, I felt right away that this could
> be the best thing ever to share free knowledge in my country and encourage
> the people of Iraq to contribute knowledge and share this with the world on
> Wikipedia.”
>
> Wikipedia is an online collection of knowledge written by volunteer editors
> from every corner of the globe. Available in nearly 300 languages,
> Wikipedia is a place to learn about virtually any topic -- from ancient
> history to science to the arts -- in your local language, for free, and
> without advertising. Wikipedia editors use reliable sources to support
> information that is included in Wikipedia articles, so readers can explore
> the sources that verify the facts. Wikipedia is completely non-profit,
> independent, and maintained by everyday people around the world.
>
> Wikipedia in Iraq is supported by a local community of volunteer editors in
> almost every major city of the country. In 2015, Sarmad and Ravan organized
> the first series of workshops in Erbil to teach Iraqi people how to edit
> Wikipedia. The workshops led to 600 new articles and more than 12,000 edits
> primarily to Arabic and Kurdish Wikipedia. In October 2015, this community
> launched the first formalized Wikimedia group from Iraq, the Iraqi
> Wikimedians user group 
> (a formalized Wikimedia affiliate group that has been recognized by the
> global Wikimedia community of editors). Today, the majority of unique
> device visits to Wikipedia in Iraq come from mobile devices.
>
> Worldwide, Wikipedia is recognized as an important learning resource, but
> it also offers a platform to share knowledge with the world. Edits from any
> country contribute to the world’s common knowledge repository, seen by
> hundreds of millions of people every month. This allows many to learn from
> what just a few people might otherwise know. As more voices contribute to
> Wikipedia, it becomes a better representation of the diverse cultures,
> history, people, viewpoints, and perspectives of our world.
>
> “Asiacell believes that sharing knowledg

Re: [Wikimedia-l] a second commons, prevent cease and desist business

[James Heilman]

Rupert here is a list of 213,000 books that are based on Wikipedia without
proper attribution.

https://www.google.ca/search?tbm=bks&hl=en&q=%22CTI+Reviews%22

James

On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 3:47 AM, David Gerard  wrote:

> This thread is notably long on hypothetical and meta-level discussions
> and very short on concrete examples of the supposedly problematic
> uploads under discussion. What are the generally accepted examples of
> what we're actually talking about here?
>
>
> - d.
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian

The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] More politics: "WMF Annual Report"

[Anna Stillwell]

You're welcome, Rogol.
Smiley face,
/a

On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Rogol Domedonfors 
wrote:

> Anna
>
> Thanks.
>
> "Rogol"
>
> On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 6:15 PM, Anna Stillwell 
> wrote:
>
> > Hey Rogol,
> > I think Zach's email (above / March 2nd) describes the changes.
> > /a
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 11:35 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <
> domedonf...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Anna
> > >
> > > I'm glad to hear that everything is all right and that you don't need
> our
> > > help after all.  When you return from your break, it would be of value
> to
> > > the community for you to let them know what those "actual changes"
> were.
> > > That way we can help you even better next time.
> > >
> > > "Rogol"
> > >
> > > On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 6:58 AM, Anna Stillwell <
> astillw...@wikimedia.org
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello Rogol,
> > > >
> > > > I think the process on this particular count already took place.
> > > > We wrote a report in good faith.
> > > > We responded to critique in good faith.
> > > > We're making actual changes in good faith.
> > > >
> > > > Have a lovely weekend. I really need a break.
> > > > Warmly,
> > > > /a
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 10:10 AM, Rogol Domedonfors <
> > > domedonf...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Anna,
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 7:46 AM, you wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > [...]
> > > > > > And I'm struggling with a process problem (not one of substance)
> > > that I
> > > > > > don't know how to solve. I truly don't. And it's kind of killing
> > me.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We (people who work and volunteer at the WMF) need a way to get
> > > > feedback.
> > > > > > We need a way to be accountable and responsive.  We all want
> that.
> > > And
> > > > I
> > > > > > actually believe that we are all working in good faith toward
> that.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > It would help us all to help you if you could indicate what
> resources
> > > you
> > > > > expect to be able to devote to this way of being accountable and
> > > > responsive
> > > > > that you are working towards, so that we can match the scale and
> > scope
> > > of
> > > > > our suggestion to what you will make available.  When you write of
> it
> > > > being
> > > > > a matter of process not substance, does that mean that you have no
> > new
> > > > > resources to allocate to this new way of working tover and above
> what
> > > you
> > > > > have already?
> > > > >
> > > > > "Rogol"
> > > > > ___
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > >  unsubscribe>
> > > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > 
> > > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Is the Code of Conduct in force?

[Lodewijk]

I get the impression that the majority of the people in this subcommunity
feel that this decision is well on its place with the technical community,
that would be most heavily impacted by it.

So I'd say, lets leave it at that.

Lodewijk

2017-03-04 21:27 GMT+01:00 Rogol Domedonfors :

> Well, one of us is in the wrong place.  I'm posting to the list described
> as "Discussion list for *the Wikimedia community* and the larger network of
> organizations [...] supporting its work." – my emphasis.  It seems that
> "This mailing list can, for example, be used for: [...]
>
> The initial planning phase of potential new Wikimedia projects and
> initiatives
> Organizational issues of the Wikimedia Foundation, chapter organizations,
> others
> Discussing the setup of local Wikimedia chapters
> Developing and evaluating grant-making programs
> Planning elections, polls and votes
> Discussion of projects that don't already have a mailing list
> Finding ways to raise funds
> Other Wikimedia-related issues
>
> My post relates to items 1,2,5 and 8 on that list.
>
> "Rogol"
>
> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 6:45 PM, Joseph Seddon 
> wrote:
>
> > This list is *a* community but it certainly does not constitute The
> > Community™ nor are we the community affected by this code of conduct.
> >
> > I suggest raising this in venues appropriate to the particular community
> in
> > question, in this case the technical community. Before bringing this
> topic
> > here it would have been far more appropriate to raise your concerns on a
> > more aligned mailing list such as wikitech-l. All of whom would be
> affected
> > by the code of conduct and who have been notified regularly about it.
> >
> > I also suggest you keep in mind that the technical community does have a
> > higher percentage of staff members from many organisations in comparison
> to
> > the number of volunteers. Simply being staff members does not preclude
> them
> > from being a part of that community and does not preclude their ability
> to
> > participate in their own self-governance.
> >
> > It would be hypercritical of us if we as the wikimedia-l list were to
> > parachute into the governance of a community relatively few of us are a
> > part of.
> >
> > Seddon
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 5:30 PM, David Gerard  wrote:
> >
> > > This assumes the relevant Community is here now on this very list,
> > > which is an extremely questionable assumption. As has been noted ad
> > > nauseam already. At this point this thread appears hard to distinguish
> > > from forum shopping.
> > >
> > > On 2 March 2017 at 17:16, Rogol Domedonfors 
> > wrote:
> > > > I'm not asking Matt.  I'm asking the Community – here, now, on this
> > very
> > > > list.
> > > >
> > > > "Rogol"
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Pine W  wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Rogol,
> > > >>
> > > >> Please don't assume that Matt thinks that the TCoC is now in effect.
> > Try
> > > >> asking him, preferably on the relevant talk page.
> > > >>
> > > >> I'm well aware of the challenges with the TCoC, but let's not make
> it
> > > more
> > > >> difficult than it is already, OK?
> > > >>
> > > >> Pine
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 11:31 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <
> > > domedonf...@gmail.com>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Matt Flaschen has declared the final amendment to the code of
> > conduct
> > > for
> > > >> > Wikimedia technical spaces approved and although he has not said
> so
> > > >> > explicitly, I assume that his current position is that it is now
> in
> > > >> force.
> > > >> > Even asuming that is correct, and previous consensus was against
> > that,
> > > >> andI
> > > >> > there is still signficiant disagreement on this list, it can
> hardly
> > > have
> > > >> > any practical effect until it is published.  But first --
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Does the Community accept that this Code of Conduct is now in
> force?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > "Rogol"
> > > >> > ___
> > > >> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > >> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > >> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > >> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > >> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > > ,
> > > >> >  > unsubscribe>
> > > >> ___
> > > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > >> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > ,
> > > >>  unsubscribe>
> > > >>
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guid

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Is the Code of Conduct in force?

[Pine W]

Hi Rogol,

Yes, to a point. But if we tried to have every discussion on this list that
was categorized as "Organizational issues of the Wikimedia Foundation,
chapter organizations", "Planning elections, polls and votes", and "Other
Wikimedia-related issues", this list would be so flooded with traffic as to
be nearly unusable. So discretion is advised in how many new topics one
brings to this list.

If you ask my opinion of "is the TCoC now in force", the answer would be
no, but I don't know that it's a wise use of time to ask that question on
this list in present circumstances. If WMF decides to try to enforce the
TCoC without an RfC on the whole document, then I think it would be fine to
come back to this list for discussion.

The way that you phrase your questions sometimes comes across to me as
having an edge than is more confrontational than I think is necessary, and
I am finding the tone to be a distraction from what is, I think, our mutual
goal of trying to align WMF more with the community. Sometimes carrots work
better than sticks. I have a long list of changes that I would like WMF to
make, but cultural change is a long term process, and sometimes patience
works better than demands.

Pine


On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 12:27 PM, Rogol Domedonfors 
wrote:

> Well, one of us is in the wrong place.  I'm posting to the list described
> as "Discussion list for *the Wikimedia community* and the larger network of
> organizations [...] supporting its work." – my emphasis.  It seems that
> "This mailing list can, for example, be used for: [...]
>
> The initial planning phase of potential new Wikimedia projects and
> initiatives
> Organizational issues of the Wikimedia Foundation, chapter organizations,
> others
> Discussing the setup of local Wikimedia chapters
> Developing and evaluating grant-making programs
> Planning elections, polls and votes
> Discussion of projects that don't already have a mailing list
> Finding ways to raise funds
> Other Wikimedia-related issues
>
> My post relates to items 1,2,5 and 8 on that list.
>
> "Rogol"
>
> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 6:45 PM, Joseph Seddon 
> wrote:
>
> > This list is *a* community but it certainly does not constitute The
> > Community™ nor are we the community affected by this code of conduct.
> >
> > I suggest raising this in venues appropriate to the particular community
> in
> > question, in this case the technical community. Before bringing this
> topic
> > here it would have been far more appropriate to raise your concerns on a
> > more aligned mailing list such as wikitech-l. All of whom would be
> affected
> > by the code of conduct and who have been notified regularly about it.
> >
> > I also suggest you keep in mind that the technical community does have a
> > higher percentage of staff members from many organisations in comparison
> to
> > the number of volunteers. Simply being staff members does not preclude
> them
> > from being a part of that community and does not preclude their ability
> to
> > participate in their own self-governance.
> >
> > It would be hypercritical of us if we as the wikimedia-l list were to
> > parachute into the governance of a community relatively few of us are a
> > part of.
> >
> > Seddon
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 5:30 PM, David Gerard  wrote:
> >
> > > This assumes the relevant Community is here now on this very list,
> > > which is an extremely questionable assumption. As has been noted ad
> > > nauseam already. At this point this thread appears hard to distinguish
> > > from forum shopping.
> > >
> > > On 2 March 2017 at 17:16, Rogol Domedonfors 
> > wrote:
> > > > I'm not asking Matt.  I'm asking the Community – here, now, on this
> > very
> > > > list.
> > > >
> > > > "Rogol"
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Pine W  wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Rogol,
> > > >>
> > > >> Please don't assume that Matt thinks that the TCoC is now in effect.
> > Try
> > > >> asking him, preferably on the relevant talk page.
> > > >>
> > > >> I'm well aware of the challenges with the TCoC, but let's not make
> it
> > > more
> > > >> difficult than it is already, OK?
> > > >>
> > > >> Pine
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 11:31 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <
> > > domedonf...@gmail.com>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Matt Flaschen has declared the final amendment to the code of
> > conduct
> > > for
> > > >> > Wikimedia technical spaces approved and although he has not said
> so
> > > >> > explicitly, I assume that his current position is that it is now
> in
> > > >> force.
> > > >> > Even asuming that is correct, and previous consensus was against
> > that,
> > > >> andI
> > > >> > there is still signficiant disagreement on this list, it can
> hardly
> > > have
> > > >> > any practical effect until it is published.  But first --
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Does the Community accept that this Code of Conduct is now in
> force?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > "Rogol"
> > > >> > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Is the Code of Conduct in force?

[Rogol Domedonfors]

Well, one of us is in the wrong place.  I'm posting to the list described
as "Discussion list for *the Wikimedia community* and the larger network of
organizations [...] supporting its work." – my emphasis.  It seems that
"This mailing list can, for example, be used for: [...]

The initial planning phase of potential new Wikimedia projects and
initiatives
Organizational issues of the Wikimedia Foundation, chapter organizations,
others
Discussing the setup of local Wikimedia chapters
Developing and evaluating grant-making programs
Planning elections, polls and votes
Discussion of projects that don't already have a mailing list
Finding ways to raise funds
Other Wikimedia-related issues

My post relates to items 1,2,5 and 8 on that list.

"Rogol"

On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 6:45 PM, Joseph Seddon  wrote:

> This list is *a* community but it certainly does not constitute The
> Community™ nor are we the community affected by this code of conduct.
>
> I suggest raising this in venues appropriate to the particular community in
> question, in this case the technical community. Before bringing this topic
> here it would have been far more appropriate to raise your concerns on a
> more aligned mailing list such as wikitech-l. All of whom would be affected
> by the code of conduct and who have been notified regularly about it.
>
> I also suggest you keep in mind that the technical community does have a
> higher percentage of staff members from many organisations in comparison to
> the number of volunteers. Simply being staff members does not preclude them
> from being a part of that community and does not preclude their ability to
> participate in their own self-governance.
>
> It would be hypercritical of us if we as the wikimedia-l list were to
> parachute into the governance of a community relatively few of us are a
> part of.
>
> Seddon
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 5:30 PM, David Gerard  wrote:
>
> > This assumes the relevant Community is here now on this very list,
> > which is an extremely questionable assumption. As has been noted ad
> > nauseam already. At this point this thread appears hard to distinguish
> > from forum shopping.
> >
> > On 2 March 2017 at 17:16, Rogol Domedonfors 
> wrote:
> > > I'm not asking Matt.  I'm asking the Community – here, now, on this
> very
> > > list.
> > >
> > > "Rogol"
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Pine W  wrote:
> > >
> > >> Rogol,
> > >>
> > >> Please don't assume that Matt thinks that the TCoC is now in effect.
> Try
> > >> asking him, preferably on the relevant talk page.
> > >>
> > >> I'm well aware of the challenges with the TCoC, but let's not make it
> > more
> > >> difficult than it is already, OK?
> > >>
> > >> Pine
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 11:31 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <
> > domedonf...@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Matt Flaschen has declared the final amendment to the code of
> conduct
> > for
> > >> > Wikimedia technical spaces approved and although he has not said so
> > >> > explicitly, I assume that his current position is that it is now in
> > >> force.
> > >> > Even asuming that is correct, and previous consensus was against
> that,
> > >> andI
> > >> > there is still signficiant disagreement on this list, it can hardly
> > have
> > >> > any practical effect until it is published.  But first --
> > >> >
> > >> > Does the Community accept that this Code of Conduct is now in force?
> > >> >
> > >> > "Rogol"
> > >> > ___
> > >> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > >> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > >> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > >> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > >> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > ,
> > >> >  unsubscribe>
> > >> ___
> > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > >> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> ,
> > >> 
> > >>
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] More politics: "WMF Annual Report"

[Rogol Domedonfors]

Anna

Thanks.

"Rogol"

On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 6:15 PM, Anna Stillwell 
wrote:

> Hey Rogol,
> I think Zach's email (above / March 2nd) describes the changes.
> /a
>
> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 11:35 PM, Rogol Domedonfors 
> wrote:
>
> > Anna
> >
> > I'm glad to hear that everything is all right and that you don't need our
> > help after all.  When you return from your break, it would be of value to
> > the community for you to let them know what those "actual changes" were.
> > That way we can help you even better next time.
> >
> > "Rogol"
> >
> > On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 6:58 AM, Anna Stillwell  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hello Rogol,
> > >
> > > I think the process on this particular count already took place.
> > > We wrote a report in good faith.
> > > We responded to critique in good faith.
> > > We're making actual changes in good faith.
> > >
> > > Have a lovely weekend. I really need a break.
> > > Warmly,
> > > /a
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 10:10 AM, Rogol Domedonfors <
> > domedonf...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Anna,
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 7:46 AM, you wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > [...]
> > > > > And I'm struggling with a process problem (not one of substance)
> > that I
> > > > > don't know how to solve. I truly don't. And it's kind of killing
> me.
> > > > >
> > > > > We (people who work and volunteer at the WMF) need a way to get
> > > feedback.
> > > > > We need a way to be accountable and responsive.  We all want that.
> > And
> > > I
> > > > > actually believe that we are all working in good faith toward that.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > It would help us all to help you if you could indicate what resources
> > you
> > > > expect to be able to devote to this way of being accountable and
> > > responsive
> > > > that you are working towards, so that we can match the scale and
> scope
> > of
> > > > our suggestion to what you will make available.  When you write of it
> > > being
> > > > a matter of process not substance, does that mean that you have no
> new
> > > > resources to allocate to this new way of working tover and above what
> > you
> > > > have already?
> > > >
> > > > "Rogol"
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > 
> > > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] More politics: "WMF Annual Report"

[Anna Stillwell]

Hey Rogol,
I think Zach's email (above / March 2nd) describes the changes.
/a

On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 11:35 PM, Rogol Domedonfors 
wrote:

> Anna
>
> I'm glad to hear that everything is all right and that you don't need our
> help after all.  When you return from your break, it would be of value to
> the community for you to let them know what those "actual changes" were.
> That way we can help you even better next time.
>
> "Rogol"
>
> On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 6:58 AM, Anna Stillwell 
> wrote:
>
> > Hello Rogol,
> >
> > I think the process on this particular count already took place.
> > We wrote a report in good faith.
> > We responded to critique in good faith.
> > We're making actual changes in good faith.
> >
> > Have a lovely weekend. I really need a break.
> > Warmly,
> > /a
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 10:10 AM, Rogol Domedonfors <
> domedonf...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Anna,
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 7:46 AM, you wrote:
> > >
> > > > [...]
> > > > And I'm struggling with a process problem (not one of substance)
> that I
> > > > don't know how to solve. I truly don't. And it's kind of killing me.
> > > >
> > > > We (people who work and volunteer at the WMF) need a way to get
> > feedback.
> > > > We need a way to be accountable and responsive.  We all want that.
> And
> > I
> > > > actually believe that we are all working in good faith toward that.
> > >
> > >
> > > It would help us all to help you if you could indicate what resources
> you
> > > expect to be able to devote to this way of being accountable and
> > responsive
> > > that you are working towards, so that we can match the scale and scope
> of
> > > our suggestion to what you will make available.  When you write of it
> > being
> > > a matter of process not substance, does that mean that you have no new
> > > resources to allocate to this new way of working tover and above what
> you
> > > have already?
> > >
> > > "Rogol"
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] a second commons, prevent cease and desist business

[David Gerard]

This thread is notably long on hypothetical and meta-level discussions
and very short on concrete examples of the supposedly problematic
uploads under discussion. What are the generally accepted examples of
what we're actually talking about here?


- d.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] More politics: "WMF Annual Report"

[David Gerard]

+1

On 4 March 2017 at 10:17, Ido ivri  wrote:
> A little late into the discussion I just want to note that aside from the
> factual reservations, which seem to make sense, the overall tone, context
> and setting of the WMF Annual report is something I wholeheartedly agree
> with, and I feel that it conveys a sense of urgency on a few fronts that
> could benefit from more truthfulness.
>
> The world looks quite different when you're contributing to Wiki projects
> just kilometers away from the bloody civil war in Syria, in a country where
> freedom of speech is continuously threatened. I for one am happy to be a
> part of a Movement that will not stay silent in the face of "post-truths"
> and the growing impediments to basic civic (and other) freedoms.
>
> If this is considered a political statement, so be it.
>
> Ido
>
> On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Peter Southwood <
> peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
>> Behalf Of George William Herbert
>> Sent: Saturday, 04 March 2017 10:47 AM
>> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
>> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] More politics: "WMF Annual Report"
>>
>> I think that the idea of taking the weekend off from the topic is
>> excellent.  We may not have reached universal consensus yet but everything
>> we needed to have said was, and it's been acknowledged as received and
>> under consideration.
>>
>> Have a good weekend everyone.
>>
>> -george
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> > On Mar 4, 2017, at 12:38 AM, Pine W  wrote:
>> >
>> > Rogol,
>> >
>> > I don't get the impression that Anna's position is that "everything is
>> > all right and that (WMF doesn't) need our help after all". That
>> > comment comes across to me as inflammatory and unhelpful.
>> >
>> > It seems to me that Anna is interested in improving the situation
>> > rather than having a battle with the community. I'd like to let the
>> > improvement process happen. Please have some patience, and let's be
>> > grateful that WMF is trying to make the situation better. I would
>> > rather see a thoughtfully re-designed report in 2 weeks than pour
>> > gasoline on the fire and have another report come out on Monday that
>> also has problems.
>> >
>> > Pine
>> > ___
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > 
>>
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>>
>> -
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2016.0.7998 / Virus Database: 4756/14054 - Release Date: 03/04/17
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] More politics: "WMF Annual Report"

[Rogol Domedonfors]

Pine

We were asked for help.  I posted a message asking how we could help in
this process.  We got a reply saying the process "already took place".  I
interpret that as meaning that our help is not needed after all.  Perhaps
you read it differently.  I don't think that makes my response, or yours
for that matter, "inflammatory and unhelpful".  I think it shows that there
is a need for clarification, which no doubt will come at some future time.

"Rogol"


On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Pine W  wrote:

> Rogol,
>
> I don't get the impression that Anna's position is that "everything is all
> right and that (WMF doesn't) need our help after all". That comment comes
> across to me as inflammatory and unhelpful.
>
> It seems to me that Anna is interested in improving the situation rather
> than having a battle with the community. I'd like to let the improvement
> process happen. Please have some patience, and let's be grateful that WMF
> is trying to make the situation better. I would rather see a thoughtfully
> re-designed report in 2 weeks than pour gasoline on the fire and have
> another report come out on Monday that also has problems.
>
> Pine
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] More politics: "WMF Annual Report"

[Ido ivri]

A little late into the discussion I just want to note that aside from the
factual reservations, which seem to make sense, the overall tone, context
and setting of the WMF Annual report is something I wholeheartedly agree
with, and I feel that it conveys a sense of urgency on a few fronts that
could benefit from more truthfulness.

The world looks quite different when you're contributing to Wiki projects
just kilometers away from the bloody civil war in Syria, in a country where
freedom of speech is continuously threatened. I for one am happy to be a
part of a Movement that will not stay silent in the face of "post-truths"
and the growing impediments to basic civic (and other) freedoms.

If this is considered a political statement, so be it.

Ido

On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Peter Southwood <
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:

>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of George William Herbert
> Sent: Saturday, 04 March 2017 10:47 AM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] More politics: "WMF Annual Report"
>
> I think that the idea of taking the weekend off from the topic is
> excellent.  We may not have reached universal consensus yet but everything
> we needed to have said was, and it's been acknowledged as received and
> under consideration.
>
> Have a good weekend everyone.
>
> -george
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Mar 4, 2017, at 12:38 AM, Pine W  wrote:
> >
> > Rogol,
> >
> > I don't get the impression that Anna's position is that "everything is
> > all right and that (WMF doesn't) need our help after all". That
> > comment comes across to me as inflammatory and unhelpful.
> >
> > It seems to me that Anna is interested in improving the situation
> > rather than having a battle with the community. I'd like to let the
> > improvement process happen. Please have some patience, and let's be
> > grateful that WMF is trying to make the situation better. I would
> > rather see a thoughtfully re-designed report in 2 weeks than pour
> > gasoline on the fire and have another report come out on Monday that
> also has problems.
> >
> > Pine
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
> -
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2016.0.7998 / Virus Database: 4756/14054 - Release Date: 03/04/17
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] a second commons, prevent cease and desist business

[Gnangarra]

Licensing and the choices have been discussed on Commons
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Requests_for_comment/AppropriatelyLicensed
 is well worth a read to understand the issue

On 4 March 2017 at 17:44, rupert THURNER  wrote:

> that i find not acceptable to be honest, james. is there a list of
> such books which can be passed on? i contacted amazon asking them why
> they sell such books. their support is very welcoming - but its easier
> for them with links.
>
> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 3:47 PM, James Heilman  wrote:
> > We have a publisher who have created a few hundred thousand books based
> on
> > Wikipedia text. Here is an example of one of many
> > https://books.google.ca/books?id=aQPMAwAAQBAJ&pg=PT100
> >
> > They do not attribute Wikipedia and they do not release the content
> under a
> > CC BY SA 3.0 license. They claim copyright to the material themselves and
> > are selling it / misleading the people who by the books. I have reached
> out
> > to them and they refuse to comply with our license even after being
> asked.
> >
> > Should we take legal action against them? IMO yes we should. While we
> > should ask people to follow our license before taking action, if they
> > refuse than we should follow through with enforcement.
> >
> > James
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 5:50 AM, Todd Allen  wrote:
> >
> >> The CC-BY-SA license asks for a basic courtesy: You give an
> acknowledgement
> >> to the person who graciously let you use their work totally free.
> >>
> >> It takes all of five seconds to add "Photo by ___" to a
> caption. It
> >> takes very little more to add a note that the photo is CC licensed. I
> can
> >> see why people are a bit put out when someone won't do these very
> minimal
> >> things in exchange for a rich library of free (as in speech and beer)
> >> material.
> >>
> >> Todd
> >>
> >> On Mar 1, 2017 10:44 PM, "rupert THURNER" 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > on the german wikipedia there was a poll to ban images of users who
> >> > send cease and desist letters, triggered by a recent case of thomas
> >> > wolf trying to charge 1200 euro out of a tiny non-profit which
> >> > improperly reused one of his images [1]. thomas article work includs
> >> > "improving text deserts, and changing bad images to (often his own)
> >> > better quality images"[2]. there is a broad majority against people
> >> > who use cease and desist letters as a business model. anyway a small
> >> > number of persons do have such a business model, some of them even
> >> > administrators on commons, like alexander savin [3][4].
> >> >
> >> > but the topic of course is much more subtle than described above, the
> >> > discussion was heated, and the result close - as always in the last 10
> >> > years. a digital divide between persons supporting the original
> >> > mindset of wikipedia which sees every additional reuse, unrestricted,
> >> > as success, and the ones who think it is not desired to incorrectly
> >> > reference, or feel that others should not make money out of their
> >> > work.
> >> >
> >> > as both are viable opinions would it be possible to split commons in
> >> > two, for every opinion? the new commons would include safe licenses
> >> > like cc-4.0 and users who are friendly to update their licenses to
> >> > better ones in future. the old commons would just stay as it is. a
> >> > user of wikipedia can easy distinguish if she wants to include both
> >> > sources, or only one of them? there is only one goal: make cease and
> >> > desist letters as business model not interesting any more,
> >> > technically, while keeping the morale of contributors high, both
> >> > sides.
> >> >
> >> > [1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meinungsbilder/
> >> > keine_Bilder_in_Artikelnamensraum_von_direkt_abmahnenden_Fotografen
> >> > [2] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spezial:Beitr%C3%A4ge/Der_
> Wolf_im_Wald
> >> > [3] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:A.Savin
> >> > [4] https://tarnkappe.info/ausgesprochen-peinlich-
> abmahnfalle-wikipedia-
> >> > interview-mit-simplicius/
> >> >
> >> > best
> >> > rupert
> >> >
> >> > ___
> >> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> >> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> ,
> >> > 
> >> ___
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >> 
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > James

Re: [Wikimedia-l] a second commons, prevent cease and desist business

[rupert THURNER]

that i find not acceptable to be honest, james. is there a list of
such books which can be passed on? i contacted amazon asking them why
they sell such books. their support is very welcoming - but its easier
for them with links.

On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 3:47 PM, James Heilman  wrote:
> We have a publisher who have created a few hundred thousand books based on
> Wikipedia text. Here is an example of one of many
> https://books.google.ca/books?id=aQPMAwAAQBAJ&pg=PT100
>
> They do not attribute Wikipedia and they do not release the content under a
> CC BY SA 3.0 license. They claim copyright to the material themselves and
> are selling it / misleading the people who by the books. I have reached out
> to them and they refuse to comply with our license even after being asked.
>
> Should we take legal action against them? IMO yes we should. While we
> should ask people to follow our license before taking action, if they
> refuse than we should follow through with enforcement.
>
> James
>
> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 5:50 AM, Todd Allen  wrote:
>
>> The CC-BY-SA license asks for a basic courtesy: You give an acknowledgement
>> to the person who graciously let you use their work totally free.
>>
>> It takes all of five seconds to add "Photo by ___" to a caption. It
>> takes very little more to add a note that the photo is CC licensed. I can
>> see why people are a bit put out when someone won't do these very minimal
>> things in exchange for a rich library of free (as in speech and beer)
>> material.
>>
>> Todd
>>
>> On Mar 1, 2017 10:44 PM, "rupert THURNER" 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > on the german wikipedia there was a poll to ban images of users who
>> > send cease and desist letters, triggered by a recent case of thomas
>> > wolf trying to charge 1200 euro out of a tiny non-profit which
>> > improperly reused one of his images [1]. thomas article work includs
>> > "improving text deserts, and changing bad images to (often his own)
>> > better quality images"[2]. there is a broad majority against people
>> > who use cease and desist letters as a business model. anyway a small
>> > number of persons do have such a business model, some of them even
>> > administrators on commons, like alexander savin [3][4].
>> >
>> > but the topic of course is much more subtle than described above, the
>> > discussion was heated, and the result close - as always in the last 10
>> > years. a digital divide between persons supporting the original
>> > mindset of wikipedia which sees every additional reuse, unrestricted,
>> > as success, and the ones who think it is not desired to incorrectly
>> > reference, or feel that others should not make money out of their
>> > work.
>> >
>> > as both are viable opinions would it be possible to split commons in
>> > two, for every opinion? the new commons would include safe licenses
>> > like cc-4.0 and users who are friendly to update their licenses to
>> > better ones in future. the old commons would just stay as it is. a
>> > user of wikipedia can easy distinguish if she wants to include both
>> > sources, or only one of them? there is only one goal: make cease and
>> > desist letters as business model not interesting any more,
>> > technically, while keeping the morale of contributors high, both
>> > sides.
>> >
>> > [1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meinungsbilder/
>> > keine_Bilder_in_Artikelnamensraum_von_direkt_abmahnenden_Fotografen
>> > [2] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spezial:Beitr%C3%A4ge/Der_Wolf_im_Wald
>> > [3] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:A.Savin
>> > [4] https://tarnkappe.info/ausgesprochen-peinlich-abmahnfalle-wikipedia-
>> > interview-mit-simplicius/
>> >
>> > best
>> > rupert
>> >
>> > ___
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > 
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>>
>
>
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
>
> The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] More politics: "WMF Annual Report"

[Peter Southwood]

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
George William Herbert
Sent: Saturday, 04 March 2017 10:47 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] More politics: "WMF Annual Report"

I think that the idea of taking the weekend off from the topic is excellent.  
We may not have reached universal consensus yet but everything we needed to 
have said was, and it's been acknowledged as received and under consideration.

Have a good weekend everyone.

-george 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 4, 2017, at 12:38 AM, Pine W  wrote:
> 
> Rogol,
> 
> I don't get the impression that Anna's position is that "everything is 
> all right and that (WMF doesn't) need our help after all". That 
> comment comes across to me as inflammatory and unhelpful.
> 
> It seems to me that Anna is interested in improving the situation 
> rather than having a battle with the community. I'd like to let the 
> improvement process happen. Please have some patience, and let's be 
> grateful that WMF is trying to make the situation better. I would 
> rather see a thoughtfully re-designed report in 2 weeks than pour 
> gasoline on the fire and have another report come out on Monday that also has 
> problems.
> 
> Pine
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2016.0.7998 / Virus Database: 4756/14054 - Release Date: 03/04/17


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] More politics: "WMF Annual Report"

[George William Herbert]

I think that the idea of taking the weekend off from the topic is excellent.  
We may not have reached universal consensus yet but everything we needed to 
have said was, and it's been acknowledged as received and under consideration.

Have a good weekend everyone.

-george 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 4, 2017, at 12:38 AM, Pine W  wrote:
> 
> Rogol,
> 
> I don't get the impression that Anna's position is that "everything is all
> right and that (WMF doesn't) need our help after all". That comment comes
> across to me as inflammatory and unhelpful.
> 
> It seems to me that Anna is interested in improving the situation rather
> than having a battle with the community. I'd like to let the improvement
> process happen. Please have some patience, and let's be grateful that WMF
> is trying to make the situation better. I would rather see a thoughtfully
> re-designed report in 2 weeks than pour gasoline on the fire and have
> another report come out on Monday that also has problems.
> 
> Pine
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] More politics: "WMF Annual Report"

[Craig Franklin]

On 4 March 2017 at 18:38, Pine W  wrote:

> It seems to me that Anna is interested in improving the situation rather
> than having a battle with the community. I'd like to let the improvement
> process happen. Please have some patience, and let's be grateful that WMF
> is trying to make the situation better. I would rather see a thoughtfully
> re-designed report in 2 weeks than pour gasoline on the fire and have
> another report come out on Monday that also has problems.
>
>
Indeed.  I have to say that for the most part this conversation has been
*exactly* how I think these sometimes difficult discussions should take
place.  Everyone has been respectful, everyone has been willing to give up
a little ground, and we're moving towards a situation that more people are
happy with.  Anna and the Communications folks deserve credit for that.

Cheers,
Craig
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] More politics: "WMF Annual Report"

[Pine W]

Rogol,

I don't get the impression that Anna's position is that "everything is all
right and that (WMF doesn't) need our help after all". That comment comes
across to me as inflammatory and unhelpful.

It seems to me that Anna is interested in improving the situation rather
than having a battle with the community. I'd like to let the improvement
process happen. Please have some patience, and let's be grateful that WMF
is trying to make the situation better. I would rather see a thoughtfully
re-designed report in 2 weeks than pour gasoline on the fire and have
another report come out on Monday that also has problems.

Pine
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,