Mailing List Archive

Shopping-enabled Wikipedia pages
Does WMF have money from trademark usage on pages starting from this
one: http://www.amazon.com/wiki/Main_Page ?

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Shopping-enabled Wikipedia pages [ In reply to ]
On 4 December 2010 20:28, Milos Rancic <millosh@gmail.com> wrote:
> Does WMF have money from trademark usage on pages starting from this
> one: http://www.amazon.com/wiki/Main_Page ?

It seems we don't, and there's no agreement in place:

http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2010-December/107830.html

"We were not consulted, and are currently fully examining this. It is
not official or endorsed by us." [Erik]

--
- Andrew Gray
  andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Shopping-enabled Wikipedia pages [ In reply to ]
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 21:31, Andrew Gray <andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk> wrote:
> On 4 December 2010 20:28, Milos Rancic <millosh@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Does WMF have money from trademark usage on pages starting from this
>> one: http://www.amazon.com/wiki/Main_Page ?
>
> It seems we don't, and there's no agreement in place:
>
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2010-December/107830.html
>
> "We were not consulted, and are currently fully examining this. It is
> not official or endorsed by us." [Erik]

Thanks for pointing to wikien-l list.

Are there some initial ideas how to get money from Amazon?

Personally, I think that this is a good opportunity to get money from
payed ads. It is not even on Wikimedia servers.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Shopping-enabled Wikipedia pages [ In reply to ]
Hi!

> Personally, I think that this is a good opportunity to get money from
> payed ads. It is not even on Wikimedia servers.

I don't think that any ads-supported 1:1 content mirror (I don't see much added value atm, we have some kind of book source support already) is any good opportunity to get money, sorry.
Why would users want to see stale ads supported version, when there's no-ads version with fresh one. The amount of how much we show our fundraising banners is just thing of organizational efficiency and ambitions.

If WMF wanted to spend less money, the fundraiser would have much lower profile, right? :)
I somehow want us to think about our users and service as primary objective, not just organizational issues.

Domas
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Shopping-enabled Wikipedia pages [ In reply to ]
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 22:20, Domas Mituzas <midom.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Personally, I think that this is a good opportunity to get money from
>> payed ads. It is not even on Wikimedia servers.
>
> I don't think that any ads-supported 1:1 content mirror (I don't see much added value atm, we have some kind of book source support already) is any good opportunity to get money, sorry.
> Why would users want to see stale ads supported version, when there's no-ads version with fresh one. The amount of how much we show our fundraising banners is just thing of organizational efficiency and ambitions.
>
> If WMF wanted to spend less money, the fundraiser would have much lower profile, right? :)
> I somehow want us to think about our users and service as primary objective, not just organizational issues.

But, should we care at all if Amazon hosts 1:1 content mirror and
gives to us some money?

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Shopping-enabled Wikipedia pages [ In reply to ]
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Domas Mituzas <midom.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> Personally, I think that this is a good opportunity to get money from
>> payed ads. It is not even on Wikimedia servers.
>
> I don't think that any ads-supported 1:1 content mirror (I don't see much added value atm, we have some kind of book source support already) is any good opportunity to get money, sorry.
> Why would users want to see stale ads supported version, when there's no-ads version with fresh one. The amount of how much we show our fundraising banners is just thing of organizational efficiency and ambitions.
>
> If WMF wanted to spend less money, the fundraiser would have much lower profile, right? :)
> I somehow want us to think about our users and service as primary objective, not just organizational issues.
>
> Domas
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

When you budget 2 million for internet hosting, and 9 million for
salaries and benefits, it's bound to raise some eyebrows, I think.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Shopping-enabled Wikipedia pages [ In reply to ]
Hi!

> But, should we care at all if Amazon hosts 1:1 content mirror and
> gives to us some money?

Maybe.

It is probably first time our content is dumped into internet by internet property that has high(er?) search engine rankings, so users may be sent to different experience than one we try to create.

Starting with technology issues - they don't have cache cluster in Europe, so it may be slower (though they did some CSS/JS optimization work, or rather didn't have to introduce all the dynamism that we do have).

Also, there is no edit button, no article history, content is stale, no discussion and no fundraising banner.
There are no links to other languages, there is no search, there is no "main page" leading to sister projects, there are no editorial notices in articles (okok, that may be a bonus ;-), there are no pointers to Wikimedia Commons, no categories.

So, even though "oh yay money is good", that money is controversial, as it means our users are robbed of best experience we can provide.
I'd be much happier if they actually improved or innovated on things and gave no money rather than give us money for whatever they're doing here.

Oh well, unless it is... ONE BILLION DOLLARS, MWAHAHAHA.

Cheers,
Domas
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Shopping-enabled Wikipedia pages [ In reply to ]
On 4 December 2010 22:09, Pedro Sanchez <pdsanchez@gmail.com> wrote:
>> If WMF wanted to spend less money, the fundraiser would have much lower profile, right? :)
>> I somehow want us to think about our users and service as primary objective, not just organizational issues.
>
> When you budget 2 million for internet hosting, and 9 million for
> salaries and benefits, it's bound to raise some eyebrows, I think.

Only from people that don't realise what is involved in hosting a top
5 website. Just $9m on salaries and benefits? That's a drop in the
ocean compared to the money spent on salaries for other similar sized
sites, even if you exclude the salaries of people involved in their
content generation (which we obviously get for free).

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Shopping-enabled Wikipedia pages [ In reply to ]
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 8:12 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4 December 2010 22:09, Pedro Sanchez <pdsanchez@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> If WMF wanted to spend less money, the fundraiser would have much lower profile, right? :)
>>> I somehow want us to think about our users and service as primary objective, not just organizational issues.
>>
>> When you budget 2 million for internet hosting, and 9 million for
>> salaries and benefits, it's bound to raise some eyebrows, I think.
>
> Only from people that don't realise what is involved in hosting a top
> 5 website. Just $9m on salaries and benefits? That's a drop in the
> ocean compared to the money spent on salaries for other similar sized
> sites, even if you exclude the salaries of people involved in their
> content generation (which we obviously get for free).
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

Yes, and only 4 times what the actual internet hosting of a top5 web site costs.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Shopping-enabled Wikipedia pages [ In reply to ]
Hoi,
I am sure you did not study the breakdown of the cost properly. This is me
assuming good faith.
Thanks,
GerardM

On 4 December 2010 23:09, Pedro Sanchez <pdsanchez@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Domas Mituzas <midom.lists@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> >> Personally, I think that this is a good opportunity to get money from
> >> payed ads. It is not even on Wikimedia servers.
> >
> > I don't think that any ads-supported 1:1 content mirror (I don't see much
> added value atm, we have some kind of book source support already) is any
> good opportunity to get money, sorry.
> > Why would users want to see stale ads supported version, when there's
> no-ads version with fresh one. The amount of how much we show our
> fundraising banners is just thing of organizational efficiency and
> ambitions.
> >
> > If WMF wanted to spend less money, the fundraiser would have much lower
> profile, right? :)
> > I somehow want us to think about our users and service as primary
> objective, not just organizational issues.
> >
> > Domas
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
> When you budget 2 million for internet hosting, and 9 million for
> salaries and benefits, it's bound to raise some eyebrows, I think.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Shopping-enabled Wikipedia pages [ In reply to ]
2010/12/4 Pedro Sanchez <pdsanchez@gmail.com>:
> When you budget 2 million for internet hosting, and 9 million for
> salaries and benefits, it's bound to raise some eyebrows, I think.

This does not include the $3.2M of planned capital expenditures
(mostly servers and other equipment), which is a large cost increase
relative to last year primarily due to a new primary data-center
build-out so we don't risk going down for weeks if there's a major
issue in our Tampa facility (and so we can designate Tampa to be a
secondary, since its quality of service is insufficient to keep it as
the primary). It also does not include operations engineering
staffing, which is one of the largest staffing increases, so we
actually have people to take care of ordering, deploying and
maintaining servers and equipment, regular production of backups,
dumps, etc.

There's a lot of non-hosting related salaries (the single largest of
which is other engineering work, such as code review, feature
development and QA), but you're misinterpreting the hosting numbers
(we should make this a bit clearer in the way we label and display the
numbers). Although WMF is not a technology organization (it develops
important community programs as well), the share of technology
spending has increased in the 2010-11 budget from 38% to 48%.

--
Erik Möller
Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Shopping-enabled Wikipedia pages [ In reply to ]
2010/12/4 Milos Rancic <millosh@gmail.com>:
> Personally, I think that this is a good opportunity to get money from
> payed ads. It is not even on Wikimedia servers.

As I said on wikien-l, the current Amazon.com use is not part of any
official relationship. We're concerned about the degree to which the
Amazon.com pages resemble Wikipedia pages. The content use itself is
clearly permitted, and we're not opposed to commercial use per se. On
the contrary, free licenses encourage this kind of experimentation by
anyone.

The potential issue with this kind of commercialization is that it
creates confusion about the "Wikipedia" brand and what it stands for.
Wikipedia is currently understood to be one of the few mainstream
sources of information that isn't commercialized, and which aims to
provide a neutral and inclusive view of any given topic. A third party
adding single-vendor shopping ads into the content, while the way the
content is presented closely resembles Wikipedia, threatens to
undermine that perception, as Amazon.com visitors may assume that this
is something that's part of our operating model.

This is why we're first and foremost concerned about the risk of
identity confusion here, about the impact of such confusion on how
Wikipedia is perceived, and about finding ways to reduce that risk.
We'll continue our exploration of this issue and will let you know as
things develop. It may also well be that this turns out to be a
short-lived experiment on Amazon.com's part.

In general, our relationship with businesses is shifting from
revenue-focused trademark licensing agreements to mission-focused
partnerships closely aligned with our strategic plan. For example,
we're trying to find the best possible partners to distribute very
large numbers of offline copies of Wikimedia content (e.g. on low-end
mobile phones used in the developing world, or as part of computing
projects targeting disadvantaged communities).
--
Erik Möller
Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Shopping-enabled Wikipedia pages [ In reply to ]
>
> In general, our relationship with businesses is shifting from
> revenue-focused trademark licensing agreements to mission-focused
> partnerships closely aligned with our strategic plan. For example,
> we're trying to find the best possible partners to distribute very
> large numbers of offline copies of Wikimedia content (e.g. on low-end
> mobile phones used in the developing world, or as part of computing
> projects targeting disadvantaged communities).
> --
> Erik Möller
> Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation
>

Wikipedia content could be included in free Kindle content which is a
free app for iPhone and Android. Images are a problem for the actual
Kindle device as well as "low-end mobile phones". Those apps could easily
include images, and possibly do.

Fred

User Fred Bauder



_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Shopping-enabled Wikipedia pages [ In reply to ]
Ah, Erik, thank you so much for writing this. I'd just been about to
write something similar: you beat me to it :-)

Thanks,
Sue

On 05/12/2010, Erik Moeller <erik@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> 2010/12/4 Milos Rancic <millosh@gmail.com>:
>> Personally, I think that this is a good opportunity to get money from
>> payed ads. It is not even on Wikimedia servers.
>
> As I said on wikien-l, the current Amazon.com use is not part of any
> official relationship. We're concerned about the degree to which the
> Amazon.com pages resemble Wikipedia pages. The content use itself is
> clearly permitted, and we're not opposed to commercial use per se. On
> the contrary, free licenses encourage this kind of experimentation by
> anyone.
>
> The potential issue with this kind of commercialization is that it
> creates confusion about the "Wikipedia" brand and what it stands for.
> Wikipedia is currently understood to be one of the few mainstream
> sources of information that isn't commercialized, and which aims to
> provide a neutral and inclusive view of any given topic. A third party
> adding single-vendor shopping ads into the content, while the way the
> content is presented closely resembles Wikipedia, threatens to
> undermine that perception, as Amazon.com visitors may assume that this
> is something that's part of our operating model.
>
> This is why we're first and foremost concerned about the risk of
> identity confusion here, about the impact of such confusion on how
> Wikipedia is perceived, and about finding ways to reduce that risk.
> We'll continue our exploration of this issue and will let you know as
> things develop. It may also well be that this turns out to be a
> short-lived experiment on Amazon.com's part.
>
> In general, our relationship with businesses is shifting from
> revenue-focused trademark licensing agreements to mission-focused
> partnerships closely aligned with our strategic plan. For example,
> we're trying to find the best possible partners to distribute very
> large numbers of offline copies of Wikimedia content (e.g. on low-end
> mobile phones used in the developing world, or as part of computing
> projects targeting disadvantaged communities).
> --
> Erik Möller
> Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation
>
> Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


--
Sue Gardner
Executive Director
Wikimedia Foundation

415 839 6885 office
415 816 9967 cell

Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!

http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Shopping-enabled Wikipedia pages [ In reply to ]
Hello,

Ultimately, this is a kind of the Clone War, when in 2005 Google
search hits were manipulated. Of of the problems of the clones is that
they show no "edit this page" and no "donate now".

Kind regards
Ziko



2010/12/5 Sue Gardner <sgardner@wikimedia.org>:
> Ah, Erik, thank you so much for writing this. I'd just been about to
> write something similar: you beat me to it :-)
>
> Thanks,
> Sue
>
> On 05/12/2010, Erik Moeller <erik@wikimedia.org> wrote:
>> 2010/12/4 Milos Rancic <millosh@gmail.com>:
>>> Personally, I think that this is a good opportunity to get money from
>>> payed ads. It is not even on Wikimedia servers.
>>
>> As I said on wikien-l, the current Amazon.com use is not part of any
>> official relationship. We're concerned about the degree to which the
>> Amazon.com pages resemble Wikipedia pages. The content use itself is
>> clearly permitted, and we're not opposed to commercial use per se. On
>> the contrary, free licenses encourage this kind of experimentation by
>> anyone.
>>
>> The potential issue with this kind of commercialization is that it
>> creates confusion about the "Wikipedia" brand and what it stands for.
>> Wikipedia is currently understood to be one of the few mainstream
>> sources of information that isn't commercialized, and which aims to
>> provide a neutral and inclusive view of any given topic. A third party
>> adding single-vendor shopping ads into the content, while the way the
>> content is presented closely resembles Wikipedia, threatens to
>> undermine that perception, as Amazon.com visitors may assume that this
>> is something that's part of our operating model.
>>
>> This is why we're first and foremost concerned about the risk of
>> identity confusion here, about the impact of such confusion on how
>> Wikipedia is perceived, and about finding ways to reduce that risk.
>> We'll continue our exploration of this issue and will let you know as
>> things develop. It may also well be that this turns out to be a
>> short-lived experiment on Amazon.com's part.
>>
>> In general, our relationship with businesses is shifting from
>> revenue-focused trademark licensing agreements to mission-focused
>> partnerships closely aligned with our strategic plan. For example,
>> we're trying to find the best possible partners to distribute very
>> large numbers of offline copies of Wikimedia content (e.g. on low-end
>> mobile phones used in the developing world, or as part of computing
>> projects targeting disadvantaged communities).
>> --
>> Erik Möller
>> Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation
>>
>> Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>
>
> --
> Sue Gardner
> Executive Director
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> 415 839 6885 office
> 415 816 9967 cell
>
> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
> sum of all knowledge.  Help us make it a reality!
>
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>



--
Ziko van Dijk
The Netherlands
http://zikoblog.wordpress.com/

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Shopping-enabled Wikipedia pages [ In reply to ]
On 5 December 2010 05:24, Pedro Sanchez <pdsanchez@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, and only 4 times what the actual internet hosting of a top5 web site costs.

[Citation needed]

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l