2 Nov 2008 12:54
Baidu Baike changed their licensing policy
Without any explaination and announcement had Baidupedia changed its licensing policy (http://www.baidu.com/search/baike_help.html#n10). From my view point there are three major changes. At first, instead of earlier, when you must search through many pages to find their copyright declerations and licensing policies now the licensing policy is directly linked at the bottom of every page. The second change is in stead of earlier, where the licensing policy and the copyright declerations were seperated into at least two pages and one must puzzle together the often contradictory statements tother the new licensing policy is now concentrated on one page, but not less confusing, as I will state beneath. The third change is that they now say that their licensing policy orient according to CC. But it does not say which CC. The text at this point is not understandable. It makes the impression as if the user can select between the different CC-policies, but actually the user can not. So actually there is no choice for that and none of their content page has any CC-declaration on it, except the well known © 2008 Baidu at the bottom of the page. My *personnal* interpretation is that they say: Dear user, you can put any CC-licensed content on our page according to that license decleration. We support that license. But actually none of their user declare which license he or she want to use, or which license the content, which they had copy and pasted, use. So the whole thing has in the pracise no effect. Everyone in the chinese community with whom I talked with say that they(Continue reading)
What have you tried? A request on bugzilla.mediawiki.org would be the
best way, I think (I've searched and can't find one there). Unless the
sysadmins have orders from on high not to give you a mailing list, I
can't see why they wouldn't be able to do it pretty quickly.
> Hopefully, in two years from now, for next elections (we can set it up
> for ourselves as a GOAL), we'll be able to host a list to discuss WMF
> rep, but since that's not the case right now, I'd like to officially
> (and humbly) ask that the WMF set up a wiki for us to discuss the issue.
> After much thinking, it seems to me that setting up a list would not be
> the easiest way to come to a consensual agreement, whilst a wiki could
> host at the same time, discussions and votes if necessary.
>
> This wiki would not be public. Its members would be chapter board members.
The way I see it, there are two things the chapters need to decide. A
method for selecting chapter reps to the WMF board, and then actually
selecting them. I can see why the latter may need to be private (that
RSS Feed