I was referring to Wikisource when I answered the question.
In a way all source texts needs some editorial curatorship and can be
called derivative texts of the authentic original.
It is naive and not helpful to think that changing typographic texts
in computer texts is'nt making a derivate (even
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 17:06, Shiju Alex wrote:
> I was referring only to Wikisource when I asked this question. In a way all
> source texts are ND. We are making sure even the errors in original source
> texts are appearing in the Wikisource version. So assumed what prohibits the
> ND licensed b
Thanks for explaining.
I was referring only to *Wikisource* when I asked this question. In a way
all source texts are ND. We are making sure even the errors in original
source texts are appearing in the Wikisource version. So assumed what
prohibits the ND licensed books in wikisource. I was not kn
We cannot and should not accept ND.
See:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Licensing_policy
Even for legal texts there is a need for free translations which are
not possible with a ND license.
Klaus Graf
http://archiv.twoday.net
2011/6/17 John Vandenberg :
> ND goes against our ob
ND goes against our objectives.
http://freedomdefined.org/
Our objective is not only to redistribute works, but also to allow
them to be reused (modified).
The only example of ND that I think Wikisource could accept is works
which are required to be reproduced faithfully by law or similar. For
Few Malayalam wikimedians (http://ml.wikisource.org) have raised this issue
recently.
All the books that we insert in Wikisource are the exact copy of the
original source text. We are not making any derivations in the source text.
So why we cannot allow ND licensed books in Wikisource.
Any though
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 9:46 PM, Amir E. Aharoni
wrote:
> 2011/6/17 John Vandenberg :
>> An interesting question was posed on foundation-l a few minutes ago. (see
>> below)
>>
>> On English Wikisource, I think there is an unwritten "guideline" that
>> the people who start a project do have a limi
2011/6/17 John Vandenberg :
> An interesting question was posed on foundation-l a few minutes ago. (see
> below)
>
> On English Wikisource, I think there is an unwritten "guideline" that
> the people who start a project do have a limited right to "OWN" that
> project.
>
> As it is an unwritten rul
An interesting question was posed on foundation-l a few minutes ago. (see below)
On English Wikisource, I think there is an unwritten "guideline" that
the people who start a project do have a limited right to "OWN" that
project.
As it is an unwritten rule, I might just be dreaming this.
I would
