This seems like an example of Wikimedia cancer.[0] They should be crowing about the novel ways in which people are spreading their freely licensed knowledge without a pile of cash, obstacles, and bureaucracy thanks to the wonders of copyleft.
Instead they seem to be complaining that someone (albeit a huge multinational corporation, though I don't see why that should matter) dare use their content without ponying up cash as a "donation" to the cause.
The tweets are all about promoting editing, and the dangers of turning Wikimedia into a read-only source of Truth, rather than something that should be seen as a shared resourced to be improved and verified. She barely mentions donations, and only in a list of all the ways people can contribute.
Instead they seem to be complaining that someone (albeit a huge multinational corporation, though I don't see why that should matter) dare use their content without ponying up cash as a "donation" to the cause.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2...