> More precisely, i'm asking what happens with wiki-style editing.
...
> >The MeatballWikiCopyright has always given us the right to
> >republish any pages on the site. The sanity of doing this
> >is questionable.

> Ah, because: "you grant Meatball a non-exclusive perpetual
> royalty-free universal license to ... distribute the content in a
> compilation of selected Meatball content"

Hi folks,
Apologies for lurking...

I've got issues

Choosing what to use for a copyright license is not the only issue
here. A fair solution takes care of more than that.

I approach copyrights and related issues by walking a mile in the
moccasins of the authors out there. In this case, a hundred miles.
Simultaneously with putting up wiction.org I am writing several pieces
that have been fireside stories for me for close to two decades..

Now they are going to paper. Er print...
Ok maybe just bits. I'm flexible. (smile)

So while I have you with me, lets look at all of this from
perspectives that are /not/ those of wiki-writers for a bit.


What does an author want?

Somtimes all that is desired is a private protected space to show off
to select publishers. [IE A grander plan is in the works to get
compensation by means outside the collaboration.]

Fame and attribution can sometimes be sufficient. After all, if my
creativity (the work) is appreciated and valuable, recognition can be
turned into 'career' for the next thing I do or for any deals that I
might strike up. A movie based on a book or short story. An epic
series with me as storyline consultant. My own TV show!
[some of you are thinking: bob! get real!
but I am very real having watched my own brother strike
deals over just that in NYC. It /is/ who you know!

But what if I already have a career? What if I write just because
there is a drive to describe and enlighten? What if its not to
entertain but to educate and perhaps warn?

A child making up a story about what rabbithole they dropped down on
their way to kindergarten does so sometimes /because/ they have an
audience. An adult may use the same rabbit hole as a device to
communicate real issues that are not politically correct because they
face repercussions if they speak in the open.

Copyright (and attendant protection) is then not just a device to make
sure authors get money or that all I's are dotted and T's crossed so a
publishers hiny is covered legally. The reason we allow pseudonyms in
published material is also to ensure protection of free speech.
Copyrights ensure that the copier doesn't mangle the message or usurp
or bend the meaning to their own ends. It gives the authors (even
under pseudonym) a say in how the material is used down the road.

I'm giveing you folks credit. There are some real smarties here.
I want to push you to come up with ideas that take care of both
legalities /and/ enforcement. I know it can be done. I have been
trying out a few.



Groupware

Any solution that you come up with will have components that don't
just ensure the survivability of the work... and not just to benefit a
single author or their estate. It has to also encourage
collaboration. You hit it on the head with "building on each other's
shoulders". You get the best wiki's when stakeholders are a rich mix
of (usually small) sub-groups.

What am I looking for when I kick in my 2cents and do an edit?
More quality.

If I am just removing graffitti, I can revert the document. More
likely I am 'building' toward a better understanding. I don't seek to
diminish the intent of the author who wrote what I am editing. After
all, it is their first pass which gets me to think in new ways.

Making it so that every contribution has an irrefutable checksum or
validity mark goes a long way here. Many of you already carry
change-logs. Is there a "history" of the md5sums to protect someones
claim?

If you make it tough for even an admin to tamper with the change-logs
then you will increase the "trust" invested by authors in your space.


Parkbench with layers of graffitti or blackboard?

I consider a wiki-page (vs a forum or blog) to be a modern form of a
blackboard in a lab or university. While you can erase anywhere and
rewrite, in reality, only some parts must be erased - there is a
corner that withstands the test of time and eventually gets a note
pointing at it, saying "do not erase". The note gets taken away but
that good-stuff stays and acreets more like-material.

Will it get refactored.. will it jump blackboards?
Will it find its way into a white paper?
It's knowledge.
It will either be recognized as being as important as E=mc2 or it will
be mistaken for a shopping list. Both? Maybe.(depends on your
religion ;)

Someone will come along after years of lapse and realize that if you
put a $ in place of the E then you have a recipie for success in a
fast food chain featuring a guy in bulky yellow pants.

Make it possible for that 'distincton' to be recognized, attributed
and rewarded and you will really be contributing to the growth and
securing of actual knowledge in the information age.



Vintage text?

What if I could highlight a section of text and find out how long it
has been there vs other edits nearby?

"The text/concept you selected was present for the last 15 years,
3 months, 5 days and 23 minutes"

Ok, so now we know why Mayans used stone relief glyphs vs Egyptions
using paint.

... Made it harder on succeeding rulers to rewrite the change-logs (er
history). Thats copyright.



Did you do your 'due dilligence'...

Why bother with what I say if all you need is an LGPL or default
copyright-backstop ?

Simple. When you finally have to appear before a judge (no matter if
you are author or publisher, plaintiff or defendant) to get a
'determination' of rights... there is often a single question asked:
[It can take many forms but asks realy the same question.]

Was there an exchange of value- did you charge for it?
What did you do to make sure the work was "protected"?
How did you defend your patent/trademark/(copyrightable)work/art?
Where were controls on the circulation?
Were there controls on who may modify?
Were 'fair-use' rules clear?
Did you make an agreement that was unenforcable?