Hello, Thank you for the link, Erik, I am going to read Pete Forsyth‘s text carefully. My thinking about the module was influenced by some WMD publications, by Till Kreutzer and also this one: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Free_Knowledge_thanks_to_Creative_Commons_Licenses.pdf So I learned about the problems of the module. In general I find it most unfortunate when a reuser has to evaluate a larger work for its elements and its different licenses - often you do not only reuse one monolithic piece but something consisting of smaller elements, or a larger group of elements (e.g. dozens of pictures about a topic). The more I was surprised when in the Strategy 2030 discussions and then recommendations the modules ND and NC were called necessary for the needs of the Global South. Though I am not a absolute or ideological opponent of any module, I wondered about the reasons and I never got an answer. In the meanwhile, the modules disappeared from the recommendations, and that is just good so. So the problem of the NC module remains that many who apply it are not always conscious about undesired consequences, while some who apply it use the module very consciously for a specific reason - e.g. in a hybrid model, to distribute content but not to share it, to reserve commercial use exclusively for oneself. I do not want to judge about this intention, but I imagine that it can become problematic when your goal is to build a knowledge *commons*. Kind regards Ziko
Benjamin Lees <emufarm...@gmail.com> schrieb am So. 12. Juli 2020 um 09:31: > On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 9:20 PM Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l < > wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote: > > > Are we really sure he would have done something in any case if we did not > > provide such options? > > > > It's pretty hard to be sure about the hypothetical behavior of > individuals. Undoubtedly, as you say, there are some people who are *only* > willing to submit material to us if it is NC, and thus we currently lose > out on material from them. Undoubtedly, as Erik says, there are also some > people who submit material to us under a free license but would choose an > NC license if it were available, and thus we currently gain the benefit of > their work being freely licensed, rather than NC. I suspect the latter > pool is far larger than the former. > > When the choice is truly between a particular non-free image and not having > any image, fair use (for projects with fair use policies) already allows us > to use that image. In other cases, it may be that no free image is > available right now, but someone can go out and take one. There would be > much less incentive to do so if we were already using an NC image, so such > stopgaps would likely become permanent. > > Of course, there will be attractive edge cases where we can fairly > confidently say "the choice is NC or nothing". But we cannot be ruled by > edge cases; we must weigh them against the costs of complexity, confusion, > and unfairness that we would be creating for ourselves (to say nothing of > the additional headache we would create for reusers). > > Emufarmers > _______________________________________________ > 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, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=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, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
