In a message dated 9/17/2008 5:30:16 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
mark(a)formonelane.net writes:
There was a case about two years ago --- my, how time flies! --- where a
Wikipedian had written a mutli-sub-page retelling of the story of 2001: A Space
Oddysey, interspersed with analysis of the film's themes and the significance
of its special effects. Not only did it go into incredible depth of
analysis, it also re-told the entire story (quoting every line of dialogue,
describing of every action). There was nothing (apart from the spectacle of
Kubrick's direction, of course) that could be gained from watching the film that one
wouldn't also get from reading the articles.
*That's* a copyright infringement.>>
--------------------------
Yes and no. "quoting every line of dialogue" of course *copies* the script.
The script itself is a copyrightable item, independently of the film and is
so copyright just by virtue of its existence in tangible media. I'm sure
everyone agrees with that.
It's your opinion that this multi-sub-page analysis was a copyright
infringement, but there is a wide exception to "copying in its entirely" at least
under US Copyright Law, if the purpose and actual result is a critique of that
work. Personally I would not suggest people try to exercise that particular
part of US Copyright Law, as it's almost always entirely unnecessary to copy
the *entire* script merely to critique it. However, for example, with images,
you almost always need to present the entire image in order to
satisfactorily acquaint your audience with it, in order to present your criticism.
Will Johnson
**************Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog,
plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com.
(http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014)
You probably want wikitech-l for this question. cc'd there.
- d.
2008/9/8 jay mehta <jmenjoy05(a)yahoo.com>:
> I am doing a research project for which I had needed to download the wiki english dump which is of 15 GB from the below link.
> http://static.wikipedia.org/downloads/2008-06/en/wikipedia-en-html.tar.7z
> My problem is with the extraction of it.when I tried to extract it could extract upto 32GB only whereas it is supposed to give me around 208GB of data. Please help me as to how to extract it.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
"We agree to make this a place where we extend a hand to each other.."
And probably this should go on top of talk pages.
Fayssal F.
On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 11:57:46 +0100 Charles Matthews <
charles.r.matthews(a)ntlworld.com>
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Philosophical: why we do this
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Message-ID:
<20080919105746.GGOL19289.aamtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@
smtp.ntlworld.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
"David Gerard" wrote
> I liked this.
>
>
http://conversationsforpossibility.blogspot.com/2008/09/what-do-you-know-th…
"Can you imagine what work life would be like if one of the conditions for
promotion was you had to give away everything you knew to people who could
use it for their growth and development, and you had to reach out and help
people to be successful, and you had to demonstrate you were open to being
helped by others in your own pursuits."
Not so much about WP, but it puts its finger on my (previous) situation as a
go teacher.
Charles
-----------------------------------------
I am doing a research project for which I had needed to download the wiki english dump which is of 15 GB from the below link.
http://static.wikipedia.org/downloads/2008-06/en/wikipedia-en-html.tar.7z
My problem is with the extraction of it.when I tried to extract it could extract upto 32GB only whereas it is supposed to give me around 208GB of data. Please help me as to how to extract it.
"David Gerard" wrote
> I liked this.
>
> http://conversationsforpossibility.blogspot.com/2008/09/what-do-you-know-th…
"Can you imagine what work life would be like if one of the conditions for promotion was you had to give away everything you knew to people who could use it for their growth and development, and you had to reach out and help people to be successful, and you had to demonstrate you were open to being helped by others in your own pursuits."
Not so much about WP, but it puts its finger on my (previous) situation as a go teacher.
Charles
-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam
Yes, but the point is that the "plotline stealers" are retelling the story as their own work and profiting off it. None of which we are doing (I hope).. Obviously to summarize a story you need to present the plot thoroughly (you can't just say "the book Moby Dick was about a whale"). This is not at all the same as copying the entire script, with annotations added in. Cliffs Notes has never been sued for copyright infringement (AFAIK) and they give a far more in-depth view than we do.
In a message dated 9/17/2008 6:28:05 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
stephen.bain(a)gmail.com writes:
However the court did discuss what might have
been necessary to constitute reproduction of a substantial part, and
taking plotlines and so forth probably would have amounted to
reproduction.>>
-------------------
The way you've worded this, does not make it clear whether you are stating
that:
A) "The court discussed it... and in THEIR discussion mentioned 'taking
plotlines'"
or
B) "The court discussed it.. and it's my opinion that 'taking plotlines'....
Can you clarify and if possible cite to the opinion discussion details
**************Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog,
plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com.
(http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014)
In a message dated 9/18/2008 2:11:52 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
charlottethewebb(a)gmail.com writes:
Ideally neither the Foundation nor anybody else using said content
should have to worry about whether they can be prosecuted for
copyright infringement or whether the "fair use" applies or whether
such a defense even exists in their area. Many jurisdictions have
stricter laws and many actually enforce them. >>
-----------------
Moot. We do not need to, not have ever needed to abide by someone else's
copyright law.
Will Johnson
**************Looking for simple solutions to your real-life financial
challenges? Check out WalletPop for the latest news and information, tips and
calculators. (http://www.walletpop.com/?NCID=emlcntuswall00000001)