Wikipedia / Wikimedia foundation is usually very generous in terms of 
using-reusing its intellectual properties, especially by <i>anyone who is 
supporting the cause or outreach</i>. <br>
<br>
The below site has to do nothing with wikipedia but intends to just &quot;sell&quot; by piggy bagging on the name of wikipedia. IMO, the website can be considered commerical with .com registration and also use of Google Adsene for revenue generation.<br>

What was more disturbing for me, was its twitter profile <a href="http://twitter.com/#!/indiawikipedia">http://twitter.com/#!/indiawikipedia</a> display image. We have already have big issues by repeatedly stating wikileaks has to do nothing with wikipedia .. No surprises if some media tommorrow says &quot;Indian wikipedia&quot; promotos nude content due to this :)<br>
<br>On related note, I wanted to recollect the earlier legal history of <a href="http://wikipediaart.org">wikipediaart.org</a> <a href="http://wikipediaart.org/legal-history/">http://wikipediaart.org/legal-history/</a> . This letter is worth reading <a href="http://wikipediaart.org/legal/032309-Isenberg.jpg">http://wikipediaart.org/legal/032309-Isenberg.jpg</a> <br>
<br>Regards<br>Tinu Cherian<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 2:48 PM, Anirudh Bhati <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:anirudhsbh@gmail.com">anirudhsbh@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 8:03 AM, CherianTinu Abraham<br>
&lt;<a href="mailto:tinucherian@gmail.com">tinucherian@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt; Please see this website <a href="http://www.indiawikipedia.com/" target="_blank">http://www.indiawikipedia.com/</a><br>
&gt; Do you think the website violates Wikipedia / WMF copyrights ? The site has<br>
&gt; nothing to do with Wikipedia or its cause too.<br>
<br>
</div>The website was probably created by a fan who does not understand<br>
trademark law.  Hardly worth giving legal attention to.<br>
<br>
(1) The website or the domain name use is non-commercial;<br>
(2) The content does not demonstrate that the website is affiliated to<br>
Wikipedia or sister-projects in any manner;<br>
(3) The website does not use the &quot;Wikipedia&quot; or &quot;Wikimedia&quot; logo.<br>
<br>
I think the Foundation should stick to defensive use of trademark law.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
anirudh<br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
&gt; _______________________________________________<br>
&gt; Wikimediaindia-l mailing list<br>
&gt; <a href="mailto:Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org">Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org</a><br>
&gt; <a href="https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l" target="_blank">https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l</a><br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org">Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l" target="_blank">https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>