I would strongly support to not lend support to the believe that everything
under the sun is copyrightable. We should, in my opinion, take the position
that trivial things like these are not copyrightable and should put a CC0
on it. We should not set an example and establish a practice that single
words can be copyrightable. At all. I think, by defaulting to that
assumption, we support the idea that these things can be legally protected
under copyright law, and by this we do a strong diservice to our actual
mission.
Sorry for the rant and for the not-completely-on-topicness.
Cheers,
Denny
2013/3/13 Matthew Flaschen <mflaschen(a)wikimedia.org>
On 03/13/2013 03:17 AM, Nikola Smolenski wrote:
Why CC0
(public domain)? Your example
(
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fr-go%C3%BBter.ogg) is CC-BY,
which is not public domain and requires attribution (which I think all
Wikimedia projects do for text). I'd say CC-BY-SA or CC-BY would be a
better default.
I am not sure about copyrightability of a pronunciation of a single word.
Neither am I, but if it's licensed under one of those and a court finds
it's not copyrightable, so be it. It still seems reasonable to use an
attribution license.
Matt Flaschen
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
--
Project director Wikidata
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Obentrautstr. 72 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. +49-30-219 158 26-0 |
http://wikimedia.de
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.