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 "sell" 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 "Indian wikipedia" 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"><<a href="mailto:anirudhsbh@gmail.com">anirudhsbh@gmail.com</a>></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>
<<a href="mailto:tinucherian@gmail.com">tinucherian@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Please see this website <a href="http://www.indiawikipedia.com/" target="_blank">http://www.indiawikipedia.com/</a><br>
> Do you think the website violates Wikipedia / WMF copyrights ? The site has<br>
> 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 "Wikipedia" or "Wikimedia" 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>
> _______________________________________________<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>
><br>
><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>