headers
John Vandenberg | 1 Aug 02:33
Picon

Fwd: [WL-Volunteers] [WL-News] ACTA trade agreement brief for July 29-31 Washington DC

a new global standard for copyright.... written by those with the
biggest portfolio and the Mickey Mouse Protection Act.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Wikileaks Press Office <press@...>
Date: Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 11:00 PM
Subject: [WL-Volunteers] [WL-News] ACTA trade agreement brief for July
29-31 Washington DC
To: volunteers@...
Cc: Wikileaks News Releases <news@...>

WIKILEAKS URGENT DOCUMENT RELEASE
Tue Jul 29 10:53:25 BST 2008

ACTA trade agreement industry negotiating brief on Border Measures and
Civil Enforcement

The ACTA negotiations are scheduled for 29 to 31 July 2008 in Washington DC.

In 2007 a select handful of the wealthiest countries began a
treaty-making process to create a new global standard for copyright,
trademark and patent enforcement, which was called, in a piece of
brilliant marketing, the "Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement".

ACTA is spearheaded by the United States, and includes the European
Commission, Japan, and Switzerland -- which have large copyright and
patent industries. Other countries invited to participate in ACTA's
negotiation process are Canada, Australia, Korea, Mexico and New
Zealand. Noticeably absent from ACTA's negotiations are leaders from
developing countries who hold national policy priorities that differ
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Mike Godwin | 1 Aug 02:39
Picon

Re: Copies of Wikipedia's articles found on Knol


Massimiliano writes:

>> How could you add SA, for example, without being the original
>> licensor, for importing to Wikipedia? How could you subtract it
>> without being the original licensor(s), for importing to Knol?
>
> As long as you put the author's credits, respecting in this way the
> request of attribution, you can change the license for your derivative
> works and this includes also adding a SA clause. At least this is what
> I have ever believed.

Sure, a sufficiently transformative derivative work might give you the  
ability to create a new license with strong copyleft. But that's not  
what we've been seeing on Knol or what we've been discussing here, it  
seems to me. Instead, we've been talking about importing and exporting  
whole articles.

--Mike

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Permalink | Reply | 24 comments |
headers
Michael Snow | 1 Aug 02:40
Picon

Re: Announcement: Tomasz Finc

Cormac Lawler wrote:
> A hearty welcome, Tomasz! I'm sure that this could easily lean towards
> information overload - as I'm sure it does for all new staff. :-)
>
> I'm not sure of your exact role though, and therefore how it fits in with
> the existing community of developers. I suppose some clarification would be
> helpful to say how community requests for software development should
> proceed, and whether your activity is being directed towards specific
> projects for now.
>   
I believe that community requests for software development continue to 
go through Bugzilla, I'm not sure why hiring Tomasz would change any of 
that. And if you read Brion's original announcement, he said Tomasz 
would be working on general MediaWiki development, though I imagine the 
team will figure out over time what areas are best for him. The 
foundation is exploring possible sources of funds for some more specific 
software development projects, but until we have something to announce 
we wouldn't be hiring specifically for those.

By the way, welcome aboard Tomasz!

--Michael Snow

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Tracy Poff | 1 Aug 02:53
Picon
Gravatar

Re: Copies of Wikipedia's articles found on Knol

On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 8:39 PM, Mike Godwin <mgodwin@...> wrote:
> Sure, a sufficiently transformative derivative work might give you the
> ability to create a new license with strong copyleft. But that's not
> what we've been seeing on Knol or what we've been discussing here, it
> seems to me. Instead, we've been talking about importing and exporting
> whole articles.

It is the position of Creative Commons, as I understand it, that if I
use a work which is licensed to me under the CC-BY license, I can then
license my derivative work to others under CC-BY-SA, CC-BY-NC, GFDL,
or any other license I choose that will preserve attribution of the
author of the original work--or, indeed, I can choose not to grant any
license at all to my work when distributing it. It seems to me that
you are thinking of the sharealike licenses.

See also Question 2.15 of
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions

--

-- 
Tracy Poff
http://sopoforic.blogspot.com/

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Permalink | Reply | 21 comments |
headers
Anthony | 1 Aug 03:18
Gravatar

Re: Copies of Wikipedia's articles found on Knol

On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 8:39 PM, Mike Godwin <mgodwin@...> wrote:
> Massimiliano writes:
>
>>> How could you add SA, for example, without being the original
>>> licensor, for importing to Wikipedia? How could you subtract it
>>> without being the original licensor(s), for importing to Knol?
>>
>> As long as you put the author's credits, respecting in this way the
>> request of attribution, you can change the license for your derivative
>> works and this includes also adding a SA clause. At least this is what
>> I have ever believed.
>
> Sure, a sufficiently transformative derivative work might give you the
> ability to create a new license with strong copyleft. But that's not
> what we've been seeing on Knol or what we've been discussing here, it
> seems to me. Instead, we've been talking about importing and exporting
> whole articles.
>
Still, what legal problems could possibly be created by copying a
CC-BY article from Knol to Wikipedia and then not making any changes,
as long as you maintain the attribution?  Presumably, the whole point
of importing it would be to improve it, and the "sufficiently
transformative" bar is incredibly low, but even if you don't create a
derivative, what's the problem?

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
geni | 1 Aug 03:26
Picon

Re: Fwd: [WL-Volunteers] [WL-News] ACTA trade agreement brief for July 29-31 Washington DC

2008/8/1 John Vandenberg <jayvdb@...>:
> Under customs enforcement for example it proposes:
>
>   * Increased inspection of goods to detect potential shipments

I understand one of the functions of being a sovereign nation is that
you can inspect pretty much anything that comes across your boarders
unless it is a diplomatic bag.

>   * Under civil enforcement rights holders will have more say on the
> damages involved as well as more compensation to cover their legal
> enforcement costs including "reasonable attorney's fees";.

Err so what? The loser pays system in the UK appears to work

> The exact composition of the business "side" is not known, which
> reflects the lack of transparency afflicting the ACTA process. Whether
> trade representatives can be forced to reveal the make-up to the press
> or policy groups remains to be seen.

The EU is involved so any formal documents would have to translated
into rather a lot of languages.

--

-- 
geni

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Anthony | 1 Aug 03:44
Gravatar

Re: Copies of Wikipedia's articles found on Knol

On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 8:53 PM, Tracy Poff <tracy.poff@...> wrote:
> It is the position of Creative Commons, as I understand it, that if I
> use a work which is licensed to me under the CC-BY license, I can then
> license my derivative work to others under CC-BY-SA, CC-BY-NC, GFDL,
> or any other license I choose that will preserve attribution of the
> author of the original work

Well, playing devil's advocate for a moment, I could see one potential
problem with adding CC-BY text into an already existing GFDL work...
If CC-BY imposes *any* requirements not required by the GFDL, then you
might have trouble with the "add no other conditions whatsoever to
those of this License" part.

I don't know of any such requirements, but I'm not willing to say it's
impossible to find any.

In an unrelated comment, some people were wondering *why* Google is
giving such limited license choices.  I don't know for sure, of
course, and I don't think they'll give a straight answer, but one
possibility is that they're worried about the implications ShareAlike
licenses would have on embedded ads.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Permalink | Reply | 20 comments |
headers
Jon | 1 Aug 03:48

Re: Chinese Wikipedia in China unblocked


Florence Devouard wrote:
> Ting Chen wrote:
>> Hello all,
>>
>> it seems that the Chinese Wikipedia is unblocked in China now. We have reports from provinces and cities
from very different corners of the country, that the users have direct access.
>>
>> Greetings
>> Ting
> 
> 
> One of the top topic in the mainstream media in my country RIGHT NOW is 
> precisely to point out that China has maintained many blocks. Foreign 
> journalists currently in China are making a lot of noise about that.
> 
> Ant
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@...
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Incidentally, it was tor the inspired me to propose the English
Wikipedia IP blocking exemption policy.  It is Tor that the blocking
exemption policy on en.wiki would permit those censored to also read and
write to the English Wikipedia.  I encourage other projects to adopt it
as well.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
geni | 1 Aug 03:59
Picon

Re: Copies of Wikipedia's articles found on Knol

2008/8/1 Anthony <wikimail@...>:
> Still, what legal problems could possibly be created by copying a
> CC-BY article from Knol to Wikipedia and then not making any changes,
> as long as you maintain the attribution?  Presumably, the whole point
> of importing it would be to improve it, and the "sufficiently
> transformative" bar is incredibly low, but even if you don't create a
> derivative, what's the problem?

Outside of the legal technicalities (IE sticking to thing I think were
intended) the requirement to include a copy of the URL of the license
(or the actual license) is a pain.

Moveing onto the legal technicalities

the "You must keep intact all notices that refer to this License..."
is a problem since the notice that refers to the license is part of
the interface and is probably copyright google and thus non free.

There is also the fairly standard "keep intact all copyright notices"
invariant section bit which is allowed under the GFDL but we generally
prefer to delete content rather than deal with copyright notices.
--

-- 
geni

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Thomas Dalton | 1 Aug 04:03
Picon

Re: Copies of Wikipedia's articles found on Knol

> In an unrelated comment, some people were wondering *why* Google is
> giving such limited license choices.  I don't know for sure, of
> course, and I don't think they'll give a straight answer, but one
> possibility is that they're worried about the implications ShareAlike
> licenses would have on embedded ads.

Unless they're worried about reusers having embedded ads, I don't see
a problem - Google require you to grant them a pretty wide ranging
license in addition to whatever you give the public.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Permalink | Reply | 19 comments |

Gmane