In reply to:
"Let's not get narky, eh? I didn't like his tone, either,"
I'm sorry if my tone offends some; the record, it was generated by the
following, which *I* didnt much like, either:
> "All images which are for non-commercial only use and by permission
only
> > are not acceptable for Wikipedia and _will be deleted_. We have
> > tolerated them for some time..."
I'm not writing here for the purposes of offending anyone; the purpose
is to provoke some thought, if not discussion (I'm sure this has
already been done, dont worry) on a policy which I find antithetical to
the notion of a commons. A secondary purpose is to provide feedback on
why I personally, have been dissuaded from contributing material to
Wikipedia. I was in the process of going through my photo archive and
linking them up to articles in Wikipedia, when I came across the
requirement that they be open to profit-making; which pulled me up very
quickly. The above statement stopped me in my tracks. If that
information is useful to you, then well and good. If not, it really
doesnt make much difference to me.
In reply to:
> Because Wikipedia is free as in freedom. Your pictures are not free
> (though apparently they are gratis); you are limiting who can
distribute
> them. Please re-evaluate contributing to Wikipedia if you are
unwilling
> to support freedom.
My answer is that I do not see how enriching private corporations
furthers freedom. My pictures are indeed gratis.
The only objection I have is to allowing others to make profits from my
work. That definition of freedom isnt in my dictionary.
Ask the Java community how they feel about Gates embracing and
extending their freedoms.
When freedom is defined by the ability of corporate persons to enrich
themselves at the expense of the community, whether thats by patenting
life forms, folk medicine, or whatever, then we have truly lost the
idea of freedom. It is of interest that the images allowable are still
restricted - by for example the "by" atrribution. Its only the "nc"
that seems to draw howls of protest.
I cannot understand why people freely contributing material to be used
by anyone else for whatever purposes they wish - EXCEPT to make a fast
buck - is considered "if you are unwilling to support freedom."
I suppose we each have our definitions of what freedom truly is.
Mike
