Wikipedia’s Senior Executive Says Apple Pulls Data And ‘Exploits’ Service Without Donation


Siri makes it easy to access information at a single touch of a button or even with just your voice commands. Google's Assistant performs the same functionality as well. Moreover, the source of a specific information to be displayed is sometimes same as well. For instance, both virtual assistants derive information from Wikipedia. However, according to Lisa Gruwell, Wikipedia's Chief Revenue Officer, Apple exploits the service by not giving back. So let's dive in to see some more details on the matter.

Wikipedia Says Companies Not Donating Could Be Charged With Exploitations Of The Service

Wikipedia's CRO stated that companies which pull data from the service without any donations could be charged with exploitation of the service. She also said that smart assistants rely greatly on Wikipedia for information. Google makes substantial donations, but Amazon and Apple do not.

Instagram has Introduced New Features to Identify Users’ Age

Gruwell has told TechCrunch that Wikipedia's information is a great source for the answer to specific queries and while companies use the service, it only makes sense to pay back.

Our content is there to be used. It’s freely-licensed and it’s freely-licensed for a reason. At the same time, it’s like the environment. It’s there to be used, but it’s not there to be exploited. We do need the people who use the content to give back in some way […]

In the case of Alexa and Siri, our content gets intermediated. Wikipedia works because people can contribute to it, people can edit it. Also, once a year, when we ask people can donate. When they get their information not from us — but Wikipedia content through something like Siri or something like Alexa — that opportunity to either contribute back as an editor is broken, and that opportunity to contribute, to donate is also broken.

Amazon does not pay anything. Apple, on the other hand, pays by matching employee donations which accounted for $50,000 last year. This is nothing compared to Google's donation of more than a million dollars in the same time frame.

There will be more to the story, so be sure to stay tuned in for more details. That's all for now, folks. What are your thoughts on Wikipedia's notion that companies not paying donations could be considered as exploiting the service? Share your views in the comments.