Everybody uses Wikipedia.
It’s currentlythe 8th most visited website in the U.S. and the 13th most trafficked site in the world. The website bills itself as the “free encyclopedia,” providing knowledge free of charge to a global user base. However, the nonprofit that runs Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, hopes that some companies will pay for it.
Don’t worry, it’ll still likely be free for you, dear Mashable reader. But for companies like Google, Facebook, Apple, and Amazon, Wikipedia is hoping to charge them for publishing its content.
A new report by Wiredlooks into a brand new division under the Wikimedia umbrella called Wikimedia Enterprise. In a first for the nonprofit Wikimedia Foundation, Wikimedia Enterprise will offer a paid service targeting Wikipedia’s biggest users: Big Tech companies.
Wikimedia Enterprise, according to the organization, will provide a commercial product that tailors Wikipedia’s content for publication on services provided by Google, Facebook, Apple, and Amazon — services that millions upon millions of people use every day.
Input a query into Google and the search engine will often provide a snippet from Wikipedia right there on the page. Users don’t even have to leave Google’s search engine for their answer. Ask Apple’s Siri or Amazon’s Alexa a question and both the virtual assistants will dig into Wikipedia’s archives to spit out an answer for you. YouTube even depends on Wikipedia to fight misinformation on its video platform.
Wikipedia’s current cost to the multi-billion dollar tech conglomerates? Nothing. It’s completely free of charge.
In a 2018 interview with TechCrunch, Wikimedia Foundation Chief Revenue Officer Lisa Seitz-Gruwell shared that while Wikipedia’s content is free to use by all, some companies were exploiting the organization by not reciprocating.
For now, Wikimedia Foundation's $100 million budget is funded by donations from users and grant money provided to the Wikimedia Foundation. Some of the companies they're looking to charge, like Google, have donated millions of dollars to the organization. The year Gruwell spoke to TechCrunch, however, the tech outlet pointed out that Amazon had donated nothing.
According to the Wikimedia Foundation, these companies currently have employees and, in some cases, entire teams, working on delivering Wikipedia’s content through its own systems. The paid service provided by Wikimedia Enterprise will help do that work for them and, in turn, bring in a new revenue stream for the nonprofit.
Obviously, Wikipedia will continue to be free for its regular global user base. In fact, Wikimedia’s Seitz-Gruwell tells Wired that the free service currently being used by Google and the other Big Tech companies will continue to be available to even those for-profit corporations.
So will Big Tech kick back some of its profits to Wikipedia, a service that has provided them so much free content for years? According to Wikimedia Foundation, the organization is already in talks with these companies and deals may be reached as early as June.
A more pressing question, however, is how will Wikipedia’s army of volunteers react? The organization has depended on its volunteers to actually create, research, update, moderate, and fact-check its content since the website’s founding. Will they view this as Wikipedia selling out? Will some want compensation for their work in return? Big Tech has been profiting off of services utilizing Wikipedia at no-charge for years. Now that Wikipedia looks to get paid, will its volunteers look to be compensated too?
Update: March, 16, 2021, 7:55 p.m. ET: The original story contained a sentence that read, "However, the nonprofit which runs Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, hopes that it soon won’t be free for everybody." For the sake of clarity, we changed it to, "However, the nonprofit that runs Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, hopes that some companies will pay for it."
Copyright © 2023 Powered by
Wikipedia wants to charge Google, Amazon, and Apple for using its content-寸地尺天网
sitemap
文章
3273
浏览
56
获赞
78616
ACLU warns that 'no replies' on Twitter could violate the constitution
Trump was basically Obama's reply guy throughout the 2010s, so it's only fitting that he won't be abBig Bad Wolf
Kaila Philo ,October 12, 2023 Big Bad WolfLock Him Up
AlienatedPicture Postcards From Train Stations
FictionThe FBI must be stoked about Zoom's encryption policy
Zoom has big privacy plans — for its paying customers, that is.After getting caught falsely clLinsanity and the Art of Escape
Yumi Lee ,August 17, 2023 Linsanity and thU.S. to spend $42 billion to expand broadband internet access under Biden plan
In many parts of the U.S., high-speed internet access is still hard to come by. Yes, even in the yeaBest free online courses from AWS
TL;DR:A wide range of Amazon Web Services courses are available to take for free on edX.Do you knowIt's way too easy to accidentally reply to Instagram Stories
I used to love Instagram Stories.After long days at work, mindlessly tapping through Stories on theTumblr introduces group spaces with Communities
Tumblr is taking a page from Reddit and Facebook with its new "Communities" feature, which are digitTwo Lovers
Jackson Davidow ,September 7, 2023 Two LovJan. 6 convict Troy Smocks sues Parler for banning him
Troy Smocks, who was sentenced to 14 months in prison following threats he posted on now-offline conApple gives students and teachers free AirPods with purchase of Mac or iPad
AirPods are cool. Free AirPods are even cooler. Apple is giving away a free pair of AirPods for studPity the Landlord
Charlie Dulik ,October 2, 2023 Pity the LaNetflix's password crackdown has so far been great … for Netflix
Ever since Netflix announced it would start cracking down on password sharing, the movie streaming c