Thursday, November 30, 2017

Evolution of sexual reproduction: Glad to learn unambiguously that Wikidata is CC-0 licensed re WUaS Corps' planned Bookstores in 299 languages (and re CC-4 MIT OCW in 5 languages) re World University and School, Lengthy clearing Wikidata email thread conversation "[Wikidata] An answer to Lydia Pintscher regarding its considerations on Wikidata and CC-0", "User:Lydia Pintscher (WMDE)/CC-0 < User:Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) Data in Wikidata is published under CC-0 ...", "WikiPathways:CC0 Announcement ..." Languages' counts are developing - Wikipedia now officially has 299 languages, Glottlog is up to 8,461 entries in languages, Ethnologue is holding steady at 7,099 living languages, and the IS0 639 has 7,865 with a local range of, And CC-4 MIT OCW is down to 5 languages ... each a database too, Mutual intelligibility is one straightforward definition of language


Glad to learn unambiguously that Wikidata is CC-0 licensed re WUaS Corporations' planned Bookstores/ComputerStores - https://worlduniversityandschool.org/BookstoreComputerStore.html (see, too: http://scott-macleod.blogspot.com/2017/10/giant-pumpkins-wuaspress-is-glad-to.html) - in 299 languages (and re CC-4 MIT OCW in 5 languages) re World University and School, Lengthy clearing Wikidata email thread conversation - "[Wikidata] An answer to Lydia Pintscher regarding its considerations on Wikidata and CC-0" (e.g. https://www.mail-archive.com/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/msg29050.html) ...


Dear Lydia, Mathieu, Nicolas and All, 

I'm seeking a clarification here to "An answer to Lydia Pintscher regarding its considerations on Wikidata and CC-0" re the implications of CC-0 licensing for Wikidata say in comparison with CC-4 licensing.

If CC-0 licensing allows for commercial use - 
"Once the creator or a subsequent owner of a work applies CC0 to a work, the work is no longer his or hers in any meaningful sense under copyright law. Anyone can then use the work in any way and for any purpose, including commercial purposes, subject to other laws and the rights others may have in the work or how the work is used. Think of CC0 as the "no rights reserved" option " (https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/CC0_FAQ ) ... 

... and, by contrast, CC-4 licensing (say by MIT OpenCourseWare in its 7 languages, for example, - where its CC-4 licensing allows for "sharing" "adapting" but "non-commercially"), what would CC-0 Wikidata licensed databases allow for commercially? Since Wikidata, or Wikisource or Project Wikicite in particular, for example, are licensed CC-0 licensing option, could (CC) Bookstores, for example, use this CC-0 licensing, in all 295 of Wikipedia's languages, for the books in their (online) bookstores? (Also are there any data, or sister projects, affiliated with Wikidata that are not CC-0 re https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Lydia_Pintscher_%28WMDE%29/CC-0 ? )

Thanks,
Scott

*

Mathieu, Lydia and All, 

As a further clarification:

I just looked up Wikipedia's license at bottom here - https://www.wikipedia.org/ - and it says it's CC-3 ((CC BY-SA 3.0)) - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ - which allows for commercial use. 

Wikidata.org's is CC-0 ( CC0 1.0 Universal (CC0 1.0) )
which also allows for commercial use.

Wiktionary doesn't seem to list a license on its front page - https://www.wiktionary.org/ .

( By way of comparison, both MIT OCW and MIT OCW Translated courses, which now seem to number 4, having recently lost Portuguese and Persian, use a CC-4 license ... ( 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) )

Noncommercial means: 
The NonCommercial (“NC”) element is found in three of the six CC licenses: BY-NC, BY-NC-SA, and BY-NC-ND. In each of these licenses, NonCommercial is expressly defined as follows: “NonCommercial means not primarily intended for or directed towards commercial advantage or monetary compensation.”Oct 15, 2017
NonCommercial interpretation - Creative Commons

(World University and School donated itself to Wikidata in 2015, but since WUaS is CC-4 MIT OpenCourseWare-centric in 5 languages, WUaS obviously doesn't donate CC MIT OCW). 

Here's more about CC licenses: 

Are there ways that Wikidata or the Wikimedia Foundation might develop further the Wikidata CC-0 license in conversation with Creative Commons organization itself (as an alternative to license laundering or license migration over time)? 

What kind of license is Wiktionary, as a Wikipedia/Wikidata sister project, likely to list on its front page in the future, especially giving its relevance for a universal translator, and for Wikimedia's Content Translation? 

I'm grateful so much thought has gone into these CC licenses - and that there are such a variety of them, some explicitly international.

Cheers, 
Scott
CC-? World University and School 

*

Scott MacLeod worlduniversityandschool@gmail.com

9:26 AM (9 minutes ago)
to Discussion, Wikimedia, Discussion
Thanks, Denny, and All,

Glad Wikidata is CC-0 re Wikipedia's now 299 languages: 
"This is the list of the different language editions of Wikipedia; as of November 2017 there are 299 Wikipedias of which 288 are active and 11 are not."

... and that MIT OCW is CC-4 (in now 5 languages), where its NC seems to offer a kind of competitive advantage re other kinds of structured data networking.

Curious where Wiktionary will head in the future with its stated licensing on its front page - and even re GNMT. 

Best regards,
Scott




On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:54 PM, Denny Vrandečić <vrandecic@gmail.com> wrote:
Scott,
The NC license clause is problematic in a number of jurisdictions. For example, at least in Germany, as I remember from my law classes, it also would definitively include not-for-profits, NGOs, and even say bloggers, with or without ads on their sites. One must always be careful in the choice of a license in order to avoid unintended consequences.
Just food for thought
Denny

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017, 20:51 John Erling Blad <jeblad@gmail.com> wrote:
My reference was to in-place discussions at WMDE, not the open meetings
with Markus. Each week we had an open demo where Markus usually attended.
As I remember the May-discussion, it was just a discussion in the office,
there was a reference to an earlier meeting. It is although easy to mix up
old memories, so what happen first and what happen next should not be taken
to be facts. If Markus also says the same it is although a reasonable
chance we have got it right.

As to the questions about archives on open discussions with the community.
This was in April-May 2012. There was no community, there were only
concerned individuals. The community started to emerge in August with the
first attempts to go public. On Wikidata_talk:Introduction there are some
posts from 15. August 2012,[1] while first post on the subject page is from
30. October. The stuff from before October comes from a copy-paste from
Meta.[3] Note that Denny writes "The data in Wikidata is published under a
free license, allowing the reuse of the data in many different scenarios."
but Whittylama changes this to "The data in Wikidata is published under [
http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ a free license], allowing
the reuse of the data in many different scenarios.",[4] and at that point
there were a community on an open site and had been for a week. When
Whittylama did his post it was the 4504th post on the site, so it was
hardly the first! The license was initially a CC-SA.[8] I'm not quite sure
when it was changed to CC0 in the footer,[9] but it seems to have happen
before 31 October 2012, at 19:09. First post on Q1 is from 29. October
2012,[5] this is one of several items updated this evening.

It is quite enlightening to start at oldid=1 [6] and stepping forward. You
will find that our present incarnation went live 25. October 2012. So much
for the "birthday". To ask for archived community discussions before 25th
October does not make sense, there were no site, and the only people
involved were mostly devs posting at Meta. Note for example that the page
Wikidata:Introduction is from Meta.[7]

[1] https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata_talk:Introduction
[2]
https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Introduction&oldid=2677
[3]
https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata_talk:Introduction&diff=133569705&oldid=128154617
[4]
https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Introduction&diff=next&oldid=4504
[5] https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q1&oldid=103
[6] https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?oldid=1
[7]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata/Introduction&oldid=4030743
[8]
https://web.archive.org/web/20121027015501/http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Main_Page
[9]
https://web.archive.org/web/20121102074347/http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Main_Page

On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 1:18 AM, Markus Krötzsch <
markus@semantic-mediawiki.org> wrote:

> Dear Mathieu,
>
> Your post demands my response since I was there when CC0 was first chosen
> (i.e., in the April meeting). I won't discuss your other claims here -- the
> discussions on the Wikidata list are already doing this, and I agree with
> Lydia that no shouting is necessary here.
>
> Nevertheless, I must at least testify to what John wrote in his earlier
> message (quote included below this email for reference): it was not Denny's
> decision to go for CC0, but the outcome of a discussion among several
> people who had worked with open data for some time before Wikidata was
> born. I have personally supported this choice and still do. I have never
> received any money directly or indirectly from Google, though -- full
> disclosure -- I got several T-shirts for supervising in Summer of Code
> projects.
>
> At no time did Google or any other company take part in our discussions in
> the zeroth hour of Wikidata. And why should they? From what I can see on
> their web page, Google has no problem with all kinds of different license
> terms in the data they display. Also, I can tell you that we would have
> reacted in a very allergic way to such attempts, so if any company had
> approached us, this would quite likely have backfired. But, believe it or
> not, when we started it was all but clear that this would become a relevant
> project at all, and no major company even cared to lobby us. It was still
> mostly a few hackers getting together in varying locations in Berlin. There
> was a lot of fun, optimism, and excitement in this early phase of Wikidata
> (well, I guess we are still in this phase).
>
> So please do not start emails with made-up stories around past events that
> you have not even been close to (calling something "research" is no
> substitute for methodology and rigour). Putting unsourced personal attacks
> against community members before all other arguments is a reckless way of
> maximising effect, and such rhetoric can damage our movement beyond this
> thread or topic. Our main strength is not our content but our community,
> and I am glad to see that many have already responded to you in such a
> measured and polite way.
>
> Peace,
>
> Markus
>
>
> On 30.11.2017 09:55, John Erling Blad wrote:
> > Licensing was discussed in the start of the project, as in start of
> > developing code for the project, and as I recall it the arguments for
> > CC0 was valid and sound. That was long before Danny started working for
> > Google.
> >
> > As I recall it was mention during first week of the project (first week
> > of april), and the duscussion reemerged during first week of
> > development. That must have been week 4 or 5 (first week of may), as the
> > delivery of the laptoppen was delayed. I was against CC0 as I expected
> > problems with reuse og external data. The arguments for CC0 convinced me.
> >
> > And yes, Denny argued for CC0 AS did Daniel and I believe Jeroen and
> > Jens did too.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata




--
-- 
- Scott MacLeod - Founder & President  
- World University and School



- CC World University and School - like CC Wikipedia with best STEM-centric CC OpenCourseWare - incorporated as a nonprofit university and school in California, and is a U.S. 501 (c) (3) tax-exempt educational organization. 


IMPORTANT NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or exempt from disclosure under applicable federal or state laws.  If the reader of this transmission is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this transmission in error, please notify me immediately by email or telephone.

World University and School is sending you this because of your interest in free, online, higher education. If you don't want to receive these, please reply with 'unsubscribe' in the body of the email, leaving the subject line intact. Thank you. 


*

User:Lydia Pintscher (WMDE)/CC-0

Data in Wikidata is published under CC-0 and there are several reasons for this. I’ll go into them in more detail here.
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Lydia_Pintscher_%28WMDE%29/CC-0

*

WikiPathways:CC0 Announcement

April 2, 2017
In our continuing effort to make pathway knowledge as widely accessible as possible, WikiPathways is adopting the Creative Commons CC0 waiver. The CC0 waiver is the current recommendation for data and databases, especially scientific data. It essentially removes any concerns and doubts about the free legal use, reuse, and remixing of our collected pathway information, while leaving untouched the ethical norms for attribution in research communities [1].


***
Languages' counts are developing ...

- Wikipedia now officially has 299 languages -
"This is the list of the different language editions of Wikipedia; as of November 2017 there are 299 Wikipedias of which 288 are active and 11 are not."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedias

- Glottlog is up to 8,461 entries in languages -
"LANGUAGES
Showing 1 to 100 of 8,461 entries"
http://glottolog.org/glottolog/language

- Ethnologue is holding steady at 7,099 living languages -
"Find, read about, and research the world's 7,099 known living languages."
https://www.ethnologue.com/

- IS0 639 has 7,865 plus local range of ... each a database too -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_639

*
- And CC-4 MIT OCW is down to 5 languages -
http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/translated-courses/

*
Mutual intelligibility is one straightforward definition of language.


*



8.7 million species
Species count put at 8.7 million. The natural world contains about 8.7 million species, according to a new estimate described by scientists as the most accurate ever. But the vast majority have not been identified - and cataloguing them all could take more than 1,000 years.Aug 23, 2011

Species count put at 8.7 million - BBC News - BBC.com

www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-14616161

*

...



at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.