Hello Gregor,
Thank you for your clear and convincing summary of 3rd party data licensing.
Could you or someone else on- or off-list tell me if Wikimedia is planning some sort of
comprehensive technical separation of 3rd party data to ensure attribution, clearance of
rights for downstream reuse etc.?
My current project,
www.linkedheritage.eu, is looking at this type of question right now
so I'm happy to discuss.
Best wishes,
Michael Hopwood
Linked Heritage Project Lead
EDItEUR
United House, North Road
London N7 9DP
UK
Tel: +44 20 7503 6418
Mob: +44 7811 591036
Skype: michael.hopwood.editeur
http://www.linkedheritage.org/
http://editeur.org/
The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be privileged. It is
intended for the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please inform the
sender and delete this e-mail immediately. The contents of this e-mail must not be
disclosed or copied without the sender's consent. We cannot accept any responsibility
for viruses, so please scan all attachments. The statements and opinions expressed in this
message are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the company.
EDItEUR Limited is a company limited by guarantee, registered in England no 2994705.
Registered Office:
United House, North Road, London N7 9DP, United Kingdom
-----Original Message-----
From: wikidata-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikidata-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
wikidata-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: 17 November 2012 12:00
To: wikidata-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Wikidata-l Digest, Vol 12, Issue 10
Send Wikidata-l mailing list submissions to
wikidata-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
wikidata-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
wikidata-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re:
Contents of Wikidata-l digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Wikidata license (was "Introduction and some questions on
Wikidata") (Gregor Hagedorn)
2. Re: Wikidata demo repo is being spammed. (Vito)
3. weekly summary #32 (Lydia Pintscher)
4. A framework for policies & similar stuffs (Vito)
5. Property specification on-wiki (Jeroen De Dauw)
6. Re: Property specification on-wiki (Daniel Kinzler)
7. Re: Property specification on-wiki (Gregor Hagedorn)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 14:06:00 +0100
From: Gregor Hagedorn <g.m.hagedorn(a)gmail.com>
To: "Discussion list for the Wikidata project."
<wikidata-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Wikidata license (was "Introduction and some
questions on Wikidata")
Message-ID:
<CADCRvwZeOZqWV7MdUyaw_z9-dwpzEJbsR5tSBY-ubjzGBaCJ1Q(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Just to clarify, my concern is about externally made
databases,
regardless of whether these are imported directly into Wikidata, or
have been incorporated into Wikipedia first and imported into Wikidata
from there. For example, the population data in Wikipedia's list of
ceremonial English counties
(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ceremonial_counties_of_England),
which also features in the infoboxes of the articles on each county,
would I think be covered by database right under U.K law. Like other
ONS material, it has been made available under the OGL, which does
impose some obligations on re-users (somewhat similar to CC-BY).
This is in interesting case. However, while the database right gives you certain rights,
it does not give you a copyright (i.e. the conent may be legally problematic, but it
cannot be covered by CC BY-SA).
Thus, the use on Wikipedia is either exclusively licensed with an obligation to prevent
re-use by third parties (which is not the case, WMF does not do this), or it is illegal,
or acceptance of open re-use is an implicit waiver of database rights.
I believe you can not allow it on Wikipedia but then NOT allow further reuse.
However, to clarify:
1. It is much preferable to add such data to Wikidata and include their source in a
structured way. Whether OGL or other licenses need to be explicitly supported by Wikidata
in the future will have to be a separate discussion, on
Wikidata.org.
2. My goal in participating in this discussion is to avoid the impression that re-use of
Wikipedia content is not possible at all without looking at each invidivual data element
and record.
3. Wikidata plans to support a hierarchy of multiple data for the same statement (multiple
values from different sources for a single property in a single item). This makes it
possible (although not
required) to mix Wikipedia-harvested information with poor sourcing with clean, well
sourced data.
4. Not harvesting from Wikipedia implies to verify that almost all information from
Wikipedia is in WIkidata, but cleanly sourced, before it si possible to migrate a class of
infoboxes to Wikidata. I believe this is an impossible task, making some import of
Wikipedia-harvested data necessary. Where better, sourced information exist, these would
take precedence.
Gregor
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 15:12:45 +0100
From: Vito <vituzzu.wiki(a)gmail.com>
To: wikidata-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Wikidata demo repo is being spammed.
Message-ID: <50A649DD.2090003(a)gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
Il 16/11/2012 07:24, Katie Filbert ha scritto:
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 2:40 AM, Snaevar
<snaevar-wiki(a)gmx.com
<mailto:snaevar-wiki@gmx.com>> wrote:
Hello,
I wanted to let you guys know that there is spam being added to
items (descriptions and labels) on the demo repo.
Thanks for reporting this.
I've deleted the spam.
Cheers,
Katie
Unfortunately I already saw spambots doing sul on wikidata, so a spam attacks are at the
hand. Please report any spam to stewards in order to let them check&lock everything.
Vito