Open content license for InfoVis wiki?: Difference between revisions
Anarchitect (talk | contribs) wondering why this is not creative comons.. |
Anarchitect (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I just noticed that this wiki does not have a clearly open [[InfoVis:Wiki:General_disclaimer|licensing policy]]. Why is this wiki’s content not put under a Creative Commons-like license? How can i be sure that my contributions remain free and reproducable? Considering that many infovis projects rely on open data or information, i think it would be appropriate to employ a [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ CC license] that allows re-use and demands attribution. This would allow for new interesting uses and give contributors the security that there efforts remain free. To be honest, i am not sure if i want to contribute any longer to something which has rather obscure IP policies. On the disclaimer page it says "totally altering someone's statement around would not be allowed, because that allows for stuffing words and realities into people's mouths." Why have a wiki then? A forum might be just as good. Apart from discussion pages, i think it is the strength of a wiki to improve statements, wordings, etc. Anybody has some ideas on that? [[User:Anarchitect|Anarchitect]] 11:15, 24 April 2008 (CEST) | I just noticed that this wiki does not have a clearly open [[InfoVis:Wiki:General_disclaimer|licensing policy]]. Why is this wiki’s content not put under a Creative Commons-like license? How can i be sure that my contributions remain free and reproducable? Considering that many infovis projects rely on open data or information, i think it would be appropriate to employ a [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ CC license] that allows re-use and demands attribution. This would allow for new interesting uses and give contributors the security that there efforts remain free. To be honest, i am not sure if i want to contribute any longer to something which has rather obscure IP policies. On the disclaimer page it says "totally altering someone's statement around would not be allowed, because that allows for stuffing words and realities into people's mouths." Why have a wiki then? A forum might be just as good. Apart from discussion pages, i think it is the strength of a wiki to improve statements, wordings, etc. Anybody has some ideas on that? [[User:Anarchitect|Anarchitect]] 11:15, 24 April 2008 (CEST) | ||
[[Category:Coffee Room]] | |||
Revision as of 10:19, 24 April 2008
I just noticed that this wiki does not have a clearly open licensing policy. Why is this wiki’s content not put under a Creative Commons-like license? How can i be sure that my contributions remain free and reproducable? Considering that many infovis projects rely on open data or information, i think it would be appropriate to employ a CC license that allows re-use and demands attribution. This would allow for new interesting uses and give contributors the security that there efforts remain free. To be honest, i am not sure if i want to contribute any longer to something which has rather obscure IP policies. On the disclaimer page it says "totally altering someone's statement around would not be allowed, because that allows for stuffing words and realities into people's mouths." Why have a wiki then? A forum might be just as good. Apart from discussion pages, i think it is the strength of a wiki to improve statements, wordings, etc. Anybody has some ideas on that? Anarchitect 11:15, 24 April 2008 (CEST)