FORUM WARNING [2] Division by zero (Line: 2933 of /srcsgcaop/boardclass.php)
Who owns Wikipedia? -
     
 
The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

> Who owns Wikipedia?, I am not a lawyer
Peter Damian
post
Post #1


I have as much free time as a Wikipedia admin!
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,400
Joined:
Member No.: 4,212



I've heard claims here occasionally that Wikipedia could be sold off. Is that possible? Who actually owns it? What is it they actually own? Could anyone get their hands on it and make a ton of money from ? What would they be getting their hands on?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Replies
Somey
post
Post #2


Can't actually moderate (or even post)
*********

Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,816
Joined:
From: Dreamland
Member No.: 275



There are two things that strike me about this, aside from the fact that even the most short-sighted businesses don't sell their #1 asset merely to "advance their stated goals."

The first, and the most obvious, is how they would reconcile the fact that Wikimedia isn't actually a charity (in any meaningful sense of the word) with these self-imposed restrictions on unloading assets, which are presumably in there primarily (if not solely) to support its spurious claim that it really is a charity. I don't think they can, so they would have to change their bylaws to make the sale, and if people got wind of the attempt in advance, they might try to stop them. I was actually thinking that these bylaws might serve an additional purpose, namely to prevent any kind of takeover whatsoever, friendly, hostile, or otherwise. (I doubt that would have been intentional, though.)

The second is that when you go from not being ad-supported to being even partially ad-supported, you have some pretty serious work to do. You're going to need some additional infrastructure in the organization - sales-people, a fulfillment department, dedicated technical support staff, maybe another accountant or three. It's likely they'd want to start small and ramp up - maybe just run something in the sidebar or a small sitewide banner, probably using some sort of automatic rotation scheme. If they suddenly threw in a whole bunch of new/untested features to show targeted ads based on page content (sort of like Google AdSense) or allow advertisers to buy space on particularly "hot" articles (namely those related to porn, politics, and current entertainment and media properties), that would be very risky, IMO.

I guess what I'm saying WRT advertising is that I believe the estimates of Wikipedia's value as an advertising platform are grossly inflated. I can certainly see them getting into 7 figures per year, maybe 8 later on if they do it right. But 50 million? I just don't see it, personally, unless several other media markets just completely collapse in the short term.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Peter Damian
post
Post #3


I have as much free time as a Wikipedia admin!
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,400
Joined:
Member No.: 4,212



QUOTE(Somey @ Sat 29th January 2011, 11:49pm) *

even the most short-sighted businesses don't sell their #1 asset merely to "advance their stated goals."


Property developers do just this. The question is whether the asset is something that fits well with the business's current ability, strategic direction, business model etc etc.

If you read anything that WMF puts out, or join in their stupid forum, it's almost like Wikipedia doesn't exist. As though they are purposefully ignoring it. And perhaps they are: if they tried to manage it like any other business, they would be in for all sorts of trouble. Their business model is simply hosting an internet site (according to them). If so, why not just sell off the asset? Or lease it somehow? As well as the recent disposal of assets, my church also leases an adjoining building to a coffee shop. The running of the business is entirely the business of its owner. The church simply collects a rental.

On how much money Wikipedia could make from advertising, that's another subject. I would split it into three colour-coded or clearly identifiable sectors. One for straight advertising. Another for hobbyists who can collect information Pokemon stuff, train timetables or old Dr Who episodes and so on. The third for properly encyclopedic content.

Outbound links from the encyclopedia part to the other parts would be alowed, but strictly controlled. It always struck me as a shame that if I look on Wikipedia for any place I know about, there is very little. It would be nice to know which are the local restaurants, what are the good places to buy property, as well as the prices of property, what shops there are and so on. So you could have links in the encyclopedia part to the advertising part, just like when you get the free London Evening Standard, you can turn to pages that advertise houses or jobs or cars.

And there's nothing to stop the hobbyists also having pages about the place they live in, with comments about the local restaurants, which ones are shit and so on.

This post has been edited by Peter Damian:
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
Peter Damian   Who owns Wikipedia?  
TungstenCarbide   I've heard claims here occasionally that Wiki...  
thekohser   I've heard claims here occasionally that Wiki...  
Ottava   I've heard claims here occasionally that Wiki...  
WikiWatch   Why would anyone want to buy it? It is already CC...  
dogbiscuit   Why would anyone want to buy it? It is already C...  
Ottava   Why would anyone want to buy it? It is already C...  
radek   I've heard claims here occasionally that Wik...  
TungstenCarbide   As the others said it's the brand name... You ...  
radek   As the others said it's the brand name... You...  
thekohser   Cause and effect. It's the brand name. That i...  
anthony   If Google decided tomorrow to copy Wikipedia...  
thekohser   The problem with that argument is that Google woul...  
dogbiscuit   If Google decided tomorrow to copy Wikipedia...  
anthony   [quote name='anthony' post='266901' date='Fri 28t...  
radek   Cause and effect. It's the brand name. That ...  
carbuncle   [quote name='thekohser' post='266900' date='Fri 2...  
WikiWatch   [quote name='thekohser' post='266900' date='Fri 2...  
anthony   As the others said it's the brand name... You...  
Kelly Martin   Greg pretty much nailed it: the main transactable ...  
Peter Damian   Who owns the fact that when I Google anything it g...  
Ottava   No 'it' is not CC-BY-SA-3.0. 'It...  
carbuncle   I was going to say that, like a hooker, you could...  
gomi   Legally, the Wikimedia Foundation (or whatever it ...  
Peter Damian   Legally, the Wikimedia Foundation (or whatever it...  
thekohser   Does anyone know who I would approach? I would l...  
Peter Damian   Does anyone know who I would approach? I would ...  
Jon Awbrey   Well I try to signal humour or irony by saying th...  
thekohser   Well I try to signal humour or irony by saying th...  
Peter Damian   Well I try to signal humour or irony by saying t...  
Kelly Martin   This is not an exhaustive list. The Wikimedia Fou...  
anthony   This is not an exhaustive list. The Wikimedia Fo...  
Abd   This is not an exhaustive list. The Wikimedia Fou...  
anthony   Mmm... nonprofits can sell advertising, and can p...  
gomi   Mmm... nonprofits can sell advertising, and can pa...  
anthony   Regarding selling advertising, many non-profits d...  
dogbiscuit   It seems antony's been drinking the Google jui...  
Peter Damian   I've heard claims here occasionally that Wiki...  
gomi   I suppose it should have been "Could anyone g...  
Peter Damian   [quote name='Peter Damian' post='266937' date='Fr...  
gomi   On who makes these decisions, how are the trustees...  
Peter Damian   [quote name='Peter Damian' post='266943' date='Fr...  
thekohser   I think Jimbo already proved that this particula...  
EricBarbour   I guess what I'm saying WRT advertising is tha...  
radek   I guess what I'm saying WRT advertising is th...  
EricBarbour   If you read anything that WMF puts out, or join in...  
Peter Damian   You've just described Wikia, btw. Not quite...  
Somey   In the case of articles about large corporations, ...  
Peter Damian   But if Wikipedia were to set up something like Wi...  
Milton Roe   [quote name='Somey' post='267030' date='Sun 30th ...  
thekohser   MWB was a much better idea. The problem always w...  
EricBarbour   You guys are assuming that Google's page ranki...  
TungstenCarbide   Perhaps Mr. Brandt would have a few choice comment...  
WikiWatch   You guys are assuming that Google's page rank...  


Reply to this topicStart new topic
3 User(s) are reading this topic (3 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now:
 
     
FORUM WARNING [2] Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home2/wikipede/public_html/int042kj398.php:242) (Line: 0 of Unknown)