Books by Wikimedia Foundation Options

[mbz1]

I've noticed recently that there are many ebooks published by Wikimedia Foundation. Let's for example take a look at this one
in particular at the section named "Etymology" (scroll down to the page #1). Please compare this section to this section of Wikipedia article.
The article is free, the book is $2.51. Why?

This post has been edited by mbz1:

[lilburne]

The license is based on the re-user fulfilling the requirements. Courts have already established that a free license has an economical value to the licensor even if cash doesn't change hands and the free license brigade are actively arguing for injunctions to stop distribution of works where a licenses terms have been broken:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobsen_v._Katzer

[dogbiscuit]

The license is based on the re-user fulfilling the requirements. Courts have already established that a free license has an economical value to the licensor even if cash doesn't change hands and the free license brigade are actively arguing for injunctions to stop distribution of works where a licenses terms have been broken:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobsen_v._Katzer

I'm still going to Yes But this, I don't doubt that you are correct, but my point is what is the relevance of this to your average Wikipedian who in reality has a minor problem, though there may be a major principle at stake.

There is an activist movement who may pursue headline cases, but as for Joe Public, are they really going to take the time and effort to pursue this?

A user has a few of his pictures used not in the terms of the licence. What is the real economic value of these? What is the cost of an injunction? Who is going to pay for that injunction? Is the WMF going to follow this up on a matter of principle to protect its asset, Wikipedia, or is the "free licence brigade" going to step in?

[melloden]

I'm still going to Yes But this, I don't doubt that you are correct, but my point is what is the relevance of this to your average Wikipedian who in reality has a minor problem, though there may be a major principle at stake.

There is an activist movement who may pursue headline cases, but as for Joe Public, are they really going to take the time and effort to pursue this?

A user has a few of his pictures used not in the terms of the licence. What is the real economic value of these? What is the cost of an injunction? Who is going to pay for that injunction? Is the WMF going to follow this up on a matter of principle to protect its asset, Wikipedia, or is the "free licence brigade" going to step in?

Mila isn't Joe Public. She's unique. Obviously the WMF is not going to give a shit about this. Mila just wants to play the finger-pointing game because how else is she going to feel "accepted" by the rest of the WRers?

It's like WP:POINT, except it's not about WP here.

[mbz1]

I'm still going to Yes But this, I don't doubt that you are correct, but my point is what is the relevance of this to your average Wikipedian who in reality has a minor problem, though there may be a major principle at stake.

There is an activist movement who may pursue headline cases, but as for Joe Public, are they really going to take the time and effort to pursue this?

A user has a few of his pictures used not in the terms of the licence. What is the real economic value of these? What is the cost of an injunction? Who is going to pay for that injunction? Is the WMF going to follow this up on a matter of principle to protect its asset, Wikipedia, or is the "free licence brigade" going to step in?

Mila isn't Joe Public. She's unique. Obviously the WMF is not going to give a shit about this. Mila just wants to play the finger-pointing game because how else is she going to feel "accepted" by the rest of the WRers?

It's like WP:POINT, except it's not about WP here.

Remember this famous dialog from "Some like it hot"

Jerry: Oh no you don't! Osgood, I'm gonna level with you. We can't get married at all.
Osgood: Why not?
Jerry: Well, in the first place, I'm not a natural blonde.
Osgood: Doesn't matter.
Jerry: I smoke! I smoke all the time!
Osgood: I don't care.
Jerry: Well, I have a terrible past. For three years now, I've been living with a saxophone player.
Osgood: I forgive you.
Jerry: [Tragically] I can never have children!
Osgood: We can adopt some.
Jerry: But you don't understand, Osgood!
[Finally gives up and pulls off his wig]
Jerry: Ohh... I'm a man!
Osgood: Nobody's perfect!

It is what happened with my communications to two attorneys from WMF.
We exchanged countless emails, we argued about the license, about attributions and about other things, and in the end I got this email today.

Hello Mila,
<name redacted> looked into the information about the book and attributions at issue and discovered that the publisher is a company called eM Publications. They published your images and created the attributions independent of Wikimedia Foundation. In order to address your concerns, you will need to contact them directly.

It would have been funny, if it were not so sad.
High payed attorneys from WMF spent hours discussing with me the matter that has no connection to them! No wonder WMF needs all the donations they could get.

[thekohser]

High payed attorneys from WMF spent hours discussing with me the matter that has no connection to them! No wonder WMF needs all the donations they could get.

Not to be smart, but didn't a couple of people from here tell you as much, within just a matter of minutes of hearing your "case"?

[mbz1]

High payed attorneys from WMF spent hours discussing with me the matter that has no connection to them! No wonder WMF needs all the donations they could get.

Not to be smart, but didn't a couple of people from here tell you as much, within just a matter of minutes of hearing your "case"?

Well, yes,but anyway, it was sooo much fun reading these emails from WMF. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)
Only after I emailed to them that every honest attorney who has at least some self-respect would agree that I am right, they told me they've nothing to do with this publications.

[melloden]

High payed attorneys from WMF spent hours discussing with me the matter that has no connection to them! No wonder WMF needs all the donations they could get.

Not to be smart, but didn't a couple of people from here tell you as much, within just a matter of minutes of hearing your "case"?

Well, yes,but anyway, it was sooo much fun reading these emails from WMF. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)
Only after I emailed to them that every honest attorney who has at least some self-respect would agree that I am right, they told me they've nothing to do with this publications.

You are stupid. What did you prove? That you wasted your own time to prove nothing except that you are stupid.

Grow up, Mila.

[mbz1]

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/fool.gif)

High payed attorneys from WMF spent hours discussing with me the matter that has no connection to them! No wonder WMF needs all the donations they could get.

Not to be smart, but didn't a couple of people from here tell you as much, within just a matter of minutes of hearing your "case"?

Well, yes,but anyway, it was sooo much fun reading these emails from WMF. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)
Only after I emailed to them that every honest attorney who has at least some self-respect would agree that I am right, they told me they've nothing to do with this publications.

You are stupid. What did you prove? That you wasted your own time to prove nothing except that you are stupid.

Grow up, Mila.

When I am having fun I gain time not loose it. I was having fun, and besides I have learned something new. That's why with your permission I have added "fool" to your user name above. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

This post has been edited by mbz1:

[melloden]

When I am having fun I gain time not loose it. I was having fun, and besides I have learned something new. That's why with your permission I have added "fool" to your user name above. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

Wow, you really do need to grow up.