The popular online encyclopedia is taking a small step away from its volunteer-based model by introducing small payments for contributions of key illustrations. The explosive growth of contribution-based communities such as YouTube and Flickr, has sparked an intense discussion around the ownership and revenue sharing of user generated content. Although, contributors benefit by gaining exposure to their work, many argue that they should get a share of the income they help generate. Wikipedia’s not-for-profit model allows it to escape calls for revenue sharing, although, apparently this leads to some gaps in the content. Philip Greenspun, who donated $20 000 to Wikipedia to fund the illustrations, explains: “In comparing the Web versions to the print versions [of encyclopedias], I noticed that the publishers’ main contribution to the quality of the books was in adding professionally drawn illustrations. It occurred to me that when the dust settled on the Wikipedia versus Britannica question, the likely conclusion would be ‘Wikipedia is more up to date; Britannica has better illustrations.’” It seems that while the voluntary contribution model is great at seeding and quickly expending the content available on Wikipedia, some sort of for-profit motive needs to exist to put the finishing touches on the overall offering.