[WikiEN-l] Re: Putting Wikipedia on a CD or DVD

Sat Mar 26 04:21:00 UTC 2005

Chad Perrin a écrit:
> Anthere wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> Christopher Mahan a écrit:
>>
>>> --- Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On the other hand, if other organisations are the
>>>> legal editors, how can we somehow get a benefit over the content
>>>> distributed ? Or should we get a benefit ?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Our benefit is that the information will be made available to people
>>> who do not have it today. That is a great benefit, and probably the
>>> most important reason for the Wikipedia's existence.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Chris Mahan
>>
>>
>>
>> Nod.
>>
>> Now, right now, MOST of the propositions we hear about are from 
>> commercial organisations, who want to make *cash* on the CD rom. Right ?
>>
>> Nothing wrong with this...
>>
>> But that means readers must pay for the cd rom...
>>
>> Are those who need more information... those who can pay for the cd rom ?
>> Or those who can not ?
> 
> 
> Here's an idea:
> 
> Nonprofit organization, talks to a commercial organization, gets a 
> massive discount (80-90% off, maybe) on those $10 CD-recorded 
> encyclopediae.  Uses donations to fund its efforts.  Buys CD-media 
> copies at the discounted rate.  Avoids taxes due to nonprofit status. 
> Distributes to those in need of the material without the ability to get 
> it themselves.
> 
> Voila: outside entit(y/ies) deal(s) with the issue.  I'm not saying 
> that's the only way to handle it, but it's "so crazy it just might 
> work".  While it seems odd to suggest buying back its own content, it's 
> even possible that WMF might do the media-buying-and-distributing itself 
> for third-world distribution.
> 
> Then, of course, the major problem becomes how to get the same knowledge 
> into the hands of those without eletricity.
> 
> There's no reason I can see why for-profit packaging of Wikipedia can't 
> be leveraged for non-profit distribution.  The fact that someone is 
> repackaging the collected knowledge for the purpose of making a buck 
> doesn't necessitate all that work being lost to the nonprofit purposes 
> of the original project.
> 
> 

I agree with you.

Ant