Page MenuHomePhabricator

Allow declaring Licenses as page attribute instead of per site
Closed, InvalidPublic


Currently we can only set on valid license in a whole wiki, e.g. CC-BY-SA-3.0, which bots (search engines) and humans read the license tag for the whole content of that wiki and as you can see on this category of commons, we only allow contents with compatible licenses with our main license which is bizarre, e.g. non-commercial licenses are not allowed while we are not trying to make money out of them. I recommend deploying attributes per page where we can create license attributes per files.


Event Timeline

Mjbmr created this task.Sep 24 2016, 9:32 AM
Restricted Application added subscribers: Poyekhali, JEumerus, Aklapper. · View Herald TranscriptSep 24 2016, 9:32 AM
Aklapper renamed this task from Variable Licenses to Allow declaring Licenses as page attribute instead of per site.Sep 24 2016, 12:38 PM
Mjbmr added a comment.Sep 24 2016, 3:21 PM

@Aklapper Variable licenses not licenses as page attribute, of course licenses as page attribute is a part of it but e.g. when you use a different license for a file page e.g. an image, should keep it in database and when use that file in other pages as well, the license of that file should also be listed in the credits section including rdf tags.

Mjbmr added a comment.Sep 24 2016, 3:25 PM

@Aklapper Also I think it's related to WMF-Legal I heard people saying we won't allow non-commercial on our wikis because people will grab them for in their commercial uses although we have credited the license.

Um, for ''which'' project do you want this? Also, setting page-specific licenses and allowing non-commercial ones seem like two different propositions.

Mjbmr added a comment.Sep 24 2016, 8:01 PM

@JEumerus Let's talk about the technical issue first, then will talk about the allowing or not allowing.

The technical issue is as you think and @Aklapper think "setting page-specific licenses" but it's not that simple, in your thoughts we can just implant magic words and generate a different licenses per pages, but as I said in the initial comment, it's per content license and should be a database implants and what I mean by that having license attribute per page, imagine having an article with 10 different files including images, sounds, videos used on it, and some of them are having different licenses than the main license on our wiki. Check the "Content discovery" link I provided in the initial comment. So when we are allowing different licenses per content, there will be some other texts at the bottom of the page rather than "Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License", e.g. this image is available under this and can't be used commercially. As it says on terms of use: "You are free to: Share and Reuse our articles and other media under free and open licenses. Under the following conditions: Lawful Behavior – You do not violate copyright or other laws." but also affects the terms of use to add any other clarification.

The other good thing about implanting this theory is we can also use rdf tags as we used on Wikinews which makes search engines understand which content can be reused or modified commercially or non-commercially.


So the problem you would like to solve is that one page (which has e.g. text content under a certain license) can include content (e.g. images under several different licenses), and all those licenses should potentially be listed in the footer?

Separating the problem description from any potential solutions, by editing the task description, is very welcome. :)

Mjbmr added a comment.Sep 24 2016, 9:11 PM

Correct but not one text per file, we can manage to categorize texts, but defiantly one rdf tag per file which are not readable by humans. btw writing a MediaWiki extension can fit all this should not be that hard than I thought, if no one else tried it by that time I probably will do it, I saw my other task related to MediaWiki is still open. :)

Mjbmr triaged this task as Low priority.Sep 24 2016, 9:16 PM
Mjbmr closed this task as Invalid.Oct 12 2016, 4:13 PM