[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive][an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] (none) [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive][an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive][an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive][an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] (none) [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive][an error occurred while processing this directive]
 
[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]
Skåne Sjælland Linux User Group - http://www.sslug.dk Home   Subscribe   Mail Archive   Forum   Calendar   Search
MhonArc Date: [Date Prev] [Date Index] [Date Next]   Thread: [Date Prev] [Thread Index] [Date Next]   MhonArc
 

Re: [ITPOLITIK] Gyldendal om Wikipedia



On 27/01/06, Jesper Krogh <sslug@sslug> wrote:
> Lad os starte med at antage at det er ulovligt: Hvem skulle komme "efter
> dem"?

Det er det der er så brand ærgeligt. Open Source initiativer
har generelt ikke ret mange penge at rykke med,
hvilket betyder store selvskaber bare kan benytte ufine
metoder mod dem.

Jeg tænker imidlertid at Wikipedia kunne gøre noget,
andre projekter ville have sværere ved.
Det er jo ikke ukendt at Wikipedia laver store indsamlinger.

De kunne jo godt, rent hypotetisk, lave en indsamlig til en retsag,
hvis det menes der er gode chancer for at vinde sådan en.

Spørgsmålet er så om folk gider give penge til sådanne formål.
En anden betænkelighed er, at når de så har vundet én retsag,
er der ingen garanti for, at der ikke ville komme flere væltende.
En vunden retsag ville dog sende nogle signaler om at
OSS ikke finder sig i disse ufine metoder, og at der er fare forbundet
med at bruge dem [de ufine metoder, ikke OSS]...


Min pointe er bare, at Wikipedia muligvis er bedre stillet til at takle sådanne
retssager, end de fleste andre frie projekter.

Med venlig hilsen, og tak for de mange svar,
Anders A. Søndergaard

--
Jabber ID: sslug@sslug, ICQ: 209444203

It wasn't infinity in fact. Infinity itself looks flat and uninteresting.
Looking up into the night sky is looking into infinity -- distance is
incomprehensible and therefore meaningless.
The chamber into which the aircar emerged was anything but infinite,
it was just very very very big, so big that it gave the impression of infinity
far better than infinity itself.


 
Home   Subscribe   Mail Archive   Index   Calendar   Search

 
 
Questions about the web-pages to <www_admin>. Last modified 2006-02-01, 02:01 CET [an error occurred while processing this directive]
This page is maintained by [an error occurred while processing this directive]MHonArc [an error occurred while processing this directive] # [an error occurred while processing this directive] *