[Wikipedia-l] New "GNU Free Media Licence"? - was: What would Richard Stallman say?

Mon Feb 23 21:43:25 UTC 2004

Robert Michel wrote:

>Salve,
>
>Am Sonntag, 22. Februar 2004 23:41 schrieb Richard Stallman:
>  
>
>>The questions you are asking are legal technicalities.  You need
>>to ask a lawyer--I am not capable of giving advise about such points.
>>    
>>
>
>So I can state that there hasn`t been a discussion about a special GNU licence 
>for pictures yet and nobody dissagreed that there is probably a need for one.
>Richard is right that this for asking a lawyer, but I´m interested in starting 
>points.
>
>As long as the world is software patents free, we have the freedom to create 
>similar softwaretools - also the text for the wikipedia could be written by 
>our-self. But historical pictures like this:
>
>Vietnam Execution (1968) Eddie Adams 
>http://www.edelmangallery.com/killer1.htm
>
>we can`t make our-self. When the photographer is still alive and hasn`t sold 
>his pictures right, that do we have the chance to ask him to support the 
>wikipedia. Jimbo has ask me to go on with my idea of a tutorial ""HowTo ask 
>effective for the use of pictures with the condition of the GNU-FDL" and 
>start to write it.
>But even when we have equal skills to Casanova, propose something smartfull 
>what will be a pleasure for the contributur and the Wikipedia - Casanova had 
>the advantage to choose willing women. Most of right holders of pictures with 
>the aim of make as much as possible money aren`t like women with unromatic 
>husbands.
>
>In this case we need to make compromises, this could be one like:
>A - getting one picture for using with GNU FDL
>B - getting the right to use this picture only on official Wikipedia server/
>mirrors, CD-Roms & official Wikipedia books (a special new licence)
>C - getting the right to use this picture with a redused quality and size
>D - creating a non public pay per view area inside the wikipedia
>E - using this picture with "fair use"
>F - don`t use this picture inside the wikipedia and use an external link 
>G - finding a very rich donator who buy the whole right of one picture and 
>free it
>H - finding a rich donator to free a picture for B only
>
>Some still open questions:
>-How can we ensure by a licence, that the information of the picture will 
>sticked together for all future?
>-How can we make it more believable that this picture is not manipulated?
>-How can be one digital signature used for the picture and the information?
>-Aren`t there reasons for creating a GNU-Free_Picture/Grafic_Licence?
>-Has there already been discussions about his?
>-Where can I found archievs of them?
>-Where is the best place to discuss a new picture/media licence?
>-Should this licence be a GNU or a Wikipedia licence?
>
>-Who is interested in joining such discussion?
>
>The GFDL is IMHO only about text and not about pictures, the GFDL do not 
>mention picture or photo. Beside the question if a GNU Free Picture Lisence 
>would be better - does the GFDL protect that this pictures are maybe allowed 
>to use without GFDL, too? I´m not keen in having just another licence, but 
>especialy the documentation of picture manipulation and sticking the picture 
>information to the picture is need enough to think about a GNU Free Picture 
>Licence, or more better about a Free Media Licence (picture, maps, sheet 
>music, audio, video...)
>
>Gruss
>rob
>
>
>PS: I would use the wappon "blaming the right owner" to do not support 
>wikipedia very carfully and very singular - only with good reasons and maybe 
>only for govermental organisation like ESA:
>"We are very disapointed to do not be able to serve you pictures to this 
>article, but the ESA deny us the support and the right to use pictures which 
>was made by 100% tax paid science. We do not have any appreciative for this 
>mindset, because the NASA is serving free pictures and make it possible to 
>complete more than 500 articles with the help of NASA pictures. Please sign 
>this petition adressed to ESA to reconsider their mindset". 
>But maybe the ESA will be friendly when we do ask them or institutes which 
>have made the science research. ;)
>But even in this case will be a more diplomatic strategie more successfull. 
>When we increase the number of "friends of the wikipedia" and some 
>wikipedianer has spoken with a minister for science and education, and this 
>minister is liking the wikipedia, he can please the minister to request ESA 
>to support wikipedia. The price for such an hight level intercessor could be 
>that we care about one wish of the minister like creating articles of one 
>field e.g. genetic engineering and print readers will a collection of this 
>articles for schools. When we have fulfilled one of his wish, we can raise 
>our next one. And a good contact to our minister would help to lobby against 
>more restrictive patent and copyright laws.
>
>Beside of writing good articles, try to win new friends for the wikipedia!
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Wikipedia-l mailing list
>Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>  
>
The GNU web site suggests creative commons.

"We believe that published software and documentation should be free 
software and free documentation <licenses.html#Intro>. We recommend 
making all sorts of educational and reference works free also, using 
free documentation licenses such as the GNU Free Documentation License 
<licenses.html#FDL> (GNU FDL)."

"For other kinds of works, we recommend you consider the licenses 
proposed by Creative Commons <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/>."

Caroline / Secretlondon