Hi there,
did anyone think of possible copyright restrictions on the use of external data within wikidata? I am not sure common public sources of data are usable right away... seems like copyright works the same with data as with any other "work"... Sure, many organizations throw data into public domain, but it definitely is not an industry standard yet.
Kozuch
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 11:00 AM, Jan Kučera kozuch82@gmail.com wrote:
Hi there,
did anyone think of possible copyright restrictions on the use of external data within wikidata? I am not sure common public sources of data are usable right away... seems like copyright works the same with data as with any other "work"... Sure, many organizations throw data into public domain, but it definitely is not an industry standard yet.
Kozuch
Right. And I think that's ok. It'll take time. Wikidata needs that time to grow a community to maintain the data in it. It's perfectly ok for Wikidata to not have a billion entries in the first month ;-) To give you an impression of some organisations that want to work together with us already and the licenses of their data: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata/Data_collaborators
Cheers Lydia
2012/8/2 Jan Kučera kozuch82@gmail.com
Hi there,
did anyone think of possible copyright restrictions on the use of external data within wikidata? I am not sure common public sources of data are usable right away... seems like copyright works the same with data as with any other "work"... Sure, many organizations throw data into public domain, but it definitely is not an industry standard yet.
Kozuch
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Hi. There is indeed laws that applys to data IF they are compiled, in my understanding - nobody can copyright the geolocalisation of the Eiffel tower alone for example, that would be absurd. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_right
In my understanding there would be a problem if somebody imports data massively from a protected database. Owners sometimes inserts false data in their datasets to be able to prove that an illegal copy has been made. But the "in beetween" single data and mass import is quite unclear to me :)
On the other hand there are licences such as http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Data
TomT0m
Should there be a clear license right from the beginning to avoid what happened to openstreetmap, which recently deleted data where they were unable to switch the license over to odbl?
Rupert Am 02.08.2012 12:12 schrieb "Thomas Douillard" thomas.douillard@gmail.com:
2012/8/2 Jan Kučera kozuch82@gmail.com
Hi there,
did anyone think of possible copyright restrictions on the use of external data within wikidata? I am not sure common public sources of data are usable right away... seems like copyright works the same with data as with any other "work"... Sure, many organizations throw data into public domain, but it definitely is not an industry standard yet.
Kozuch
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Hi. There is indeed laws that applys to data IF they are compiled, in my understanding - nobody can copyright the geolocalisation of the Eiffel tower alone for example, that would be absurd. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_right
In my understanding there would be a problem if somebody imports data massively from a protected database. Owners sometimes inserts false data in their datasets to be able to prove that an illegal copy has been made. But the "in beetween" single data and mass import is quite unclear to me :)
On the other hand there are licences such as http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Data
TomT0m
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Yes this is quite important decision to be made... So far officials here did not comment on it... Do they want to use cc-by-sa or rather odbl? Dne 2.8.2012 19:58 "rupert THURNER" rupert.thurner@gmail.com napsal(a):
Should there be a clear license right from the beginning to avoid what happened to openstreetmap, which recently deleted data where they were unable to switch the license over to odbl?
Rupert Am 02.08.2012 12:12 schrieb "Thomas Douillard" <thomas.douillard@gmail.com
:
2012/8/2 Jan Kučera kozuch82@gmail.com
Hi there,
did anyone think of possible copyright restrictions on the use of external data within wikidata? I am not sure common public sources of data are usable right away... seems like copyright works the same with data as with any other "work"... Sure, many organizations throw data into public domain, but it definitely is not an industry standard yet.
Kozuch
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Hi. There is indeed laws that applys to data IF they are compiled, in my understanding - nobody can copyright the geolocalisation of the Eiffel tower alone for example, that would be absurd. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_right
In my understanding there would be a problem if somebody imports data massively from a protected database. Owners sometimes inserts false data in their datasets to be able to prove that an illegal copy has been made. But the "in beetween" single data and mass import is quite unclear to me :)
On the other hand there are licences such as http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Data
TomT0m
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 9:04 PM, Jan Kučera kozuch82@gmail.com wrote:
Yes this is quite important decision to be made... So far officials here did not comment on it... Do they want to use cc-by-sa or rather odbl?
Awww I don't count as official? *sob* ;-)
The plan is to go with CC-0 at the beginning.
Cheers Lydia
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 8:57 PM, rupert THURNER rupert.thurner@gmail.com wrote:
Should there be a clear license right from the beginning to avoid what happened to openstreetmap, which recently deleted data where they were unable to switch the license over to odbl?
Of course there has to be a license from the beginning on. As I said in my other email already the plan is CC-0.
Cheers Lydia
So no copyleft?
2012/8/2 Lydia Pintscher lydia.pintscher@wikimedia.de:
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 8:57 PM, rupert THURNER rupert.thurner@gmail.com wrote:
Should there be a clear license right from the beginning to avoid what happened to openstreetmap, which recently deleted data where they were unable to switch the license over to odbl?
Of course there has to be a license from the beginning on. As I said in my other email already the plan is CC-0.
Cheers Lydia
-- Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher Community Communications for Wikidata
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Obentrautstr. 72 10963 Berlin www.wikimedia.de
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Jan,
as said, the data in Wikidata will be published under CC-0. The other text (project pages etc.) will use CC-BY-SA. CC-0 allows the community later, when it is there, to discuss and to switch the license and not get into the situation that Open Street Maps has gone through.
There are plenty of prior examples of WMF projects publishing not under copyleft licenses, think of the help pages on MediaWiki.org or many media files on Commons [2].
Cheers, Denny
[1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Contents [2] http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:CC-BY-3.0
2012/8/3 Jan Kučera kozuch82@gmail.com:
So no copyleft?
2012/8/2 Lydia Pintscher lydia.pintscher@wikimedia.de:
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 8:57 PM, rupert THURNER rupert.thurner@gmail.com wrote:
Should there be a clear license right from the beginning to avoid what happened to openstreetmap, which recently deleted data where they were unable to switch the license over to odbl?
Of course there has to be a license from the beginning on. As I said in my other email already the plan is CC-0.
Cheers Lydia
-- Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher Community Communications for Wikidata
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Obentrautstr. 72 10963 Berlin www.wikimedia.de
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
cc0 is this one, isn't it? http://creativecommons.org/about/cc0
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 11:08 AM, Denny Vrandečić denny.vrandecic@wikimedia.de wrote:
Jan,
as said, the data in Wikidata will be published under CC-0. The other text (project pages etc.) will use CC-BY-SA. CC-0 allows the community later, when it is there, to discuss and to switch the license and not get into the situation that Open Street Maps has gone through.
There are plenty of prior examples of WMF projects publishing not under copyleft licenses, think of the help pages on MediaWiki.org or many media files on Commons [2].
Cheers, Denny
[1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Contents [2] http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:CC-BY-3.0
2012/8/3 Jan Kučera kozuch82@gmail.com:
So no copyleft?
2012/8/2 Lydia Pintscher lydia.pintscher@wikimedia.de:
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 8:57 PM, rupert THURNER rupert.thurner@gmail.com wrote:
Should there be a clear license right from the beginning to avoid what happened to openstreetmap, which recently deleted data where they were unable to switch the license over to odbl?
Of course there has to be a license from the beginning on. As I said in my other email already the plan is CC-0.
Cheers Lydia
-- Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher Community Communications for Wikidata
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Obentrautstr. 72 10963 Berlin www.wikimedia.de
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-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.
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Yes.
2012/8/3 rupert THURNER rupert.thurner@gmail.com:
cc0 is this one, isn't it? http://creativecommons.org/about/cc0
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 11:08 AM, Denny Vrandečić denny.vrandecic@wikimedia.de wrote:
Jan,
as said, the data in Wikidata will be published under CC-0. The other text (project pages etc.) will use CC-BY-SA. CC-0 allows the community later, when it is there, to discuss and to switch the license and not get into the situation that Open Street Maps has gone through.
There are plenty of prior examples of WMF projects publishing not under copyleft licenses, think of the help pages on MediaWiki.org or many media files on Commons [2].
Cheers, Denny
[1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Contents [2] http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:CC-BY-3.0
2012/8/3 Jan Kučera kozuch82@gmail.com:
So no copyleft?
2012/8/2 Lydia Pintscher lydia.pintscher@wikimedia.de:
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 8:57 PM, rupert THURNER rupert.thurner@gmail.com wrote:
Should there be a clear license right from the beginning to avoid what happened to openstreetmap, which recently deleted data where they were unable to switch the license over to odbl?
Of course there has to be a license from the beginning on. As I said in my other email already the plan is CC-0.
Cheers Lydia
-- Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher Community Communications for Wikidata
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Obentrautstr. 72 10963 Berlin www.wikimedia.de
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-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.
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Hm,
but I think you fail to import data from Wikipedia under CC-0... from lists, infoboxes and even the language links?
2012/8/3 Denny Vrandečić denny.vrandecic@wikimedia.de:
Yes.
2012/8/3 rupert THURNER rupert.thurner@gmail.com:
cc0 is this one, isn't it? http://creativecommons.org/about/cc0
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 11:08 AM, Denny Vrandečić denny.vrandecic@wikimedia.de wrote:
Jan,
as said, the data in Wikidata will be published under CC-0. The other text (project pages etc.) will use CC-BY-SA. CC-0 allows the community later, when it is there, to discuss and to switch the license and not get into the situation that Open Street Maps has gone through.
There are plenty of prior examples of WMF projects publishing not under copyleft licenses, think of the help pages on MediaWiki.org or many media files on Commons [2].
Cheers, Denny
[1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Contents [2] http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:CC-BY-3.0
2012/8/3 Jan Kučera kozuch82@gmail.com:
So no copyleft?
2012/8/2 Lydia Pintscher lydia.pintscher@wikimedia.de:
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 8:57 PM, rupert THURNER rupert.thurner@gmail.com wrote:
Should there be a clear license right from the beginning to avoid what happened to openstreetmap, which recently deleted data where they were unable to switch the license over to odbl?
Of course there has to be a license from the beginning on. As I said in my other email already the plan is CC-0.
Cheers Lydia
-- Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher Community Communications for Wikidata
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Obentrautstr. 72 10963 Berlin www.wikimedia.de
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-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.
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-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.
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
On 03.08.2012 15:04, Jan Kučera wrote:
Hm,
but I think you fail to import data from Wikipedia under CC-0... from lists, infoboxes and even the language links?
Individual data points are not copyrightable, so they can just be copied. If this wasn't the case, we could not cite any non-free Works in Wikipedia either.
Anything that constitutes even a sentence can not be copied to Wikidata, or needs an extra license statement attached. Lucky, our data structure is flexible enough that we could even do that, though i'd like to avoid it.
-- daniel
On 3 August 2012 15:10, Daniel Kinzler daniel.kinzler@wikimedia.de wrote:
Anything that constitutes even a sentence can not be copied to Wikidata, or needs an extra license statement attached.
Depends on the sentence. I find it doubtful that many single sentences in infoboxes are sufficiently creative to warrant copyright protection. It is the creativity that is protected, not adequate expression of knowledge.
Gregor
On 03.08.2012 16:01, Gregor Hagedorn wrote:
On 3 August 2012 15:10, Daniel Kinzler <daniel.kinzler@wikimedia.de mailto:daniel.kinzler@wikimedia.de> wrote:
Anything that constitutes even a sentence can not be copied to Wikidata, or needs an extra license statement attached.Depends on the sentence. I find it doubtful that many single sentences in infoboxes are sufficiently creative to warrant copyright protection. It is the creativity that is protected, not adequate expression of knowledge.
Yea, I was erring on the side of caution here. Any fully automated import would have to skip any free text, because it *might* be protected.
-- daniel
Yea, I was erring on the side of caution here. Any fully automated import would have to skip any free text, because it *might* be protected.
I think there is a danger to be overly cautious. The purpose of infoboxes is to express knowledge in a consise way. One might want to add an additional protection by refusing any text that consists of more than 3 sentences or a given number of words (20?). But free form text like (from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mysql):
License http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_license GNU General Public License http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License (version 2, with linking exceptionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPL_linking_exception) or proprietary EULA http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EULA
is not creative and thus not copyright protected.
Gregor
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Gregor Hagedorn g.m.hagedorn@gmail.comwrote:
Yea, I was erring on the side of caution here. Any fully automated import
would have to skip any free text, because it *might* be protected.
I think there is a danger to be overly cautious. The purpose of infoboxes is to express knowledge in a consise way. One might want to add an additional protection by refusing any text that consists of more than 3 sentences or a given number of words (20?). But free form text like (from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mysql):
License http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_license GNU General Public License http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License (version 2, with linking exceptionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPL_linking_exception) or proprietary EULA http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EULA
is not creative and thus not copyright protected.
Sure, but what if it was "GPL <ref>It used to be WTFPL license until 20-3-2012 when they got in legal trouble in [[sharks vs dolphins]], which resulted in the doctrine that "mammals have restricted rights in international waters unless holding an European country flag.</ref>"
Ok, what about a dataset? Sure set of cc-0 nodes implies cc-0 dataset in math, but in text this is not valid any more as words are not copyrightable but a sentence is? Dne 3.8.2012 14:10 "Daniel Kinzler" daniel.kinzler@wikimedia.de napsal(a):
On 03.08.2012 15:04, Jan Kučera wrote:
Hm,
but I think you fail to import data from Wikipedia under CC-0... from lists, infoboxes and even the language links?
Individual data points are not copyrightable, so they can just be copied. If this wasn't the case, we could not cite any non-free Works in Wikipedia either.
Anything that constitutes even a sentence can not be copied to Wikidata, or needs an extra license statement attached. Lucky, our data structure is flexible enough that we could even do that, though i'd like to avoid it.
-- daniel
-- Daniel Kinzler, Softwarearchitekt
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Eisenacher Straße 2 | 10777 Berlin http://wikimedia.de | Tel. (030) 219 158 260
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.
Jan Kučera schrieb am 03.08.2012 15:04:
but I think you fail to import data from Wikipedia under CC-0... from lists, infoboxes and even the language links?
You may also read the disc on meta...
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikidata#Is_CC_the_right_license_for_dat...
From my understanding, yes, it won't be possible to import data from Wikipedia infoboxes etc. into a CC0 WikiData. (At least under European Union law, where databases are protected by copyright)
The answer from Denny Vrandečić was: "Wikidata does not plan to extract content out of Wikipedia at all."
The problem, I think is, that Wikipedieans just expect that this is exactly what WikiData is actually meant for - to absorb the data stuff from Wikipedia. And on the other hand: how useful is WikiData, if you tell the Wikipedians, that they are not allowed to move data from Wikipedia into WikiData?
Alex
From my understanding, yes, it won't be possible to import data from Wikipedia infoboxes etc. into a CC0 WikiData. (At least under European Union law, where databases are protected by copyright)
The answer from Denny Vrandečić was: "Wikidata does not plan to extract content out of Wikipedia at all."
The problem, I think is, that Wikipedieans just expect that this is exactly what WikiData is actually meant for - to absorb the data stuff from Wikipedia. And on the other hand: how useful is WikiData, if you tell the Wikipedians, that they are not allowed to move data from Wikipedia into WikiData?
This is the reason why I recommanded from the beginning to adopt for WikiData not the "no-restriction at all" CC0 licence but one fitted to data and respectfuil to Wikipedia's general choice of creating a common good of knowledge by ensuring the need to share the reused information (share-alike clause of CC-BY-SA) : the Open Database Licence (ODbL) from the Open Knowledge Foundation does exactly this and is already being used by ma,ny people,; including official cities or regions for example here in France. http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ Unfortunately it looked back then like the decision was being taken without any real debate when it should be at the center of the project's grounds...
Best,
Benjamin Ooghe-Tabanou from Regards Citoyens http://www.RegardsCitoyens.org
Alex
-- http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Alexrk2
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Benjamin, all,
taking from the beginning a license like ODBL would make it hard or even impossible to switch later to, e.g. CC-BY-SA 4.0, which might be a more natural choice since the rest of the WMF projects are mostly licensed under CC-BY-SA. ODBL and CC-BY-SA are not mutually compatible.
The question of a license is complicated, has wide implications, and deserves a much wider discussion in a community that does not exist yet. Unlike any other license, CC-0 allows us to later change the license. Also, CC-0 makes it easiest to include the content from Wikidata in the Wikipedias and anywhere else, which is great for the start.
CC-0 seems to me the only choice that would allow us to delegate the proper discussion about the license into the future, when the community is actually there. Any other license would make such a discussion impossible.
I think such a discussion can be prepared now, and arguments can be gathered for possible licenses, but it can not be decided now -- it is simply too early.
Best regards, Denny
2012/8/4 Benjamin Ooghe-Tabanou b.ooghe@gmail.com:
From my understanding, yes, it won't be possible to import data from Wikipedia infoboxes etc. into a CC0 WikiData. (At least under European Union law, where databases are protected by copyright)
The answer from Denny Vrandečić was: "Wikidata does not plan to extract content out of Wikipedia at all."
The problem, I think is, that Wikipedieans just expect that this is exactly what WikiData is actually meant for - to absorb the data stuff from Wikipedia. And on the other hand: how useful is WikiData, if you tell the Wikipedians, that they are not allowed to move data from Wikipedia into WikiData?
This is the reason why I recommanded from the beginning to adopt for WikiData not the "no-restriction at all" CC0 licence but one fitted to data and respectfuil to Wikipedia's general choice of creating a common good of knowledge by ensuring the need to share the reused information (share-alike clause of CC-BY-SA) : the Open Database Licence (ODbL) from the Open Knowledge Foundation does exactly this and is already being used by ma,ny people,; including official cities or regions for example here in France. http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ Unfortunately it looked back then like the decision was being taken without any real debate when it should be at the center of the project's grounds...
Best,
Benjamin Ooghe-Tabanou from Regards Citoyens http://www.RegardsCitoyens.org
Alex
-- http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Alexrk2
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Denny,
I agree this is too early. CC4 being on the way, I believe the best option would be not to opt for a temporary licence and just wait until CC-BY-SA 4 can be used. This would seem to fit into the wikidata agenda, whouldn't it?
PS: Regarding compat between ODBL and CC-BY-SA, it is still a longly debated subject that nobody did a real case for yet with v3, but I believe ODC people are working on ensuring the compat at least with v4
Benjamin Ooghe-Tabanou
On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 10:31 PM, Denny Vrandečić denny.vrandecic@wikimedia.de wrote:
Benjamin, all,
taking from the beginning a license like ODBL would make it hard or even impossible to switch later to, e.g. CC-BY-SA 4.0, which might be a more natural choice since the rest of the WMF projects are mostly licensed under CC-BY-SA. ODBL and CC-BY-SA are not mutually compatible.
The question of a license is complicated, has wide implications, and deserves a much wider discussion in a community that does not exist yet. Unlike any other license, CC-0 allows us to later change the license. Also, CC-0 makes it easiest to include the content from Wikidata in the Wikipedias and anywhere else, which is great for the start.
CC-0 seems to me the only choice that would allow us to delegate the proper discussion about the license into the future, when the community is actually there. Any other license would make such a discussion impossible.
I think such a discussion can be prepared now, and arguments can be gathered for possible licenses, but it can not be decided now -- it is simply too early.
Best regards, Denny
2012/8/4 Benjamin Ooghe-Tabanou b.ooghe@gmail.com:
From my understanding, yes, it won't be possible to import data from Wikipedia infoboxes etc. into a CC0 WikiData. (At least under European Union law, where databases are protected by copyright)
The answer from Denny Vrandečić was: "Wikidata does not plan to extract content out of Wikipedia at all."
The problem, I think is, that Wikipedieans just expect that this is exactly what WikiData is actually meant for - to absorb the data stuff from Wikipedia. And on the other hand: how useful is WikiData, if you tell the Wikipedians, that they are not allowed to move data from Wikipedia into WikiData?
This is the reason why I recommanded from the beginning to adopt for WikiData not the "no-restriction at all" CC0 licence but one fitted to data and respectfuil to Wikipedia's general choice of creating a common good of knowledge by ensuring the need to share the reused information (share-alike clause of CC-BY-SA) : the Open Database Licence (ODbL) from the Open Knowledge Foundation does exactly this and is already being used by ma,ny people,; including official cities or regions for example here in France. http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ Unfortunately it looked back then like the decision was being taken without any real debate when it should be at the center of the project's grounds...
Best,
Benjamin Ooghe-Tabanou from Regards Citoyens http://www.RegardsCitoyens.org
Alex
-- http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Alexrk2
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-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.
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
From my understanding, yes, it won't be possible to import data from Wikipedia infoboxes etc. into a CC0 WikiData. (At least under European Union law, where databases are protected by copyright)
is incorrect. A database right (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_rights) is not a copyright, it is an independent property right granted on non-copyrightable materials. Since only the database as a whole achieves protection, not individual contributions, it is unclear to me whether Wikimedia Foundation can claim that right, or whether in the present situation of no-one owning the entire database, that right is actually unclaimable.
However, I believe this is irrelevant. Creative Commons version 3 does include database rights for those localized licenses in legislations implementing database rights (e.g. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/nl/legalcode http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/de/legalcode). They are included in the works, while at the same time, the license does waive any specific database rights to avoid database right proliferation.
Gregor
Gregor Hagedorn schrieb am 04.08.2012 19:02:
From my understanding, yes, it won't be possible to import data from Wikipedia infoboxes etc. into a CC0 WikiData. (At least under European Union law, where databases are protected by copyright)
is incorrect.
OK, to be correct, it's called a "Sui generis right" (SGDR)
However, I believe this is irrelevant. Creative Commons version 3 does include database rights for those localized licenses in legislations implementing database rights (e.g. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/nl/legalcode http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/de/legalcode http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/nl/legalcode%20http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/de/legalcode). They are included in the works, while at the same time, the license does waive any specific database rights to avoid database right proliferation.
That is interesting. I didn't know, that the ported versions of CC-3 (like the German) have such an additional clause for waiving SGDRs. Although Wikipedia explicitly referring to the *unported* version without the SGDR clause. [1]
Along with CC-4 something about SGDR will change.[2] If I understand it correctly, it will be similar to the ODbL. But it's pretty complicated.
However, I would find it weird, if something like a list of the streets of Berlin [3] would not fall under the same licence conditions as any other "normal" Wikipedia article, just because it is more a kind of a database.
Alex
On 04.08.2012 19:42, Alexrk wrote:
However, I would find it weird, if something like a list of the streets of Berlin [3] would not fall under the same licence conditions as any other "normal" Wikipedia article, just because it is more a kind of a database.
As far as I understand, a list of all streets of berlin is not copyrightable at all (and even database protection is doubtful for a full list, since the protection is based on the curation and effort of selection). If it's not copyrightable, any license based on copyright can not possibly apply to it. Also, database rights are held by the *publisher* (that is, WMF), not the author. So, even if database rights apply, the author could not license the work but would, as far as I understand this, be transferring the rights to the publisher automatically (this seams very strange to me, but apparently, that's how database rights work).
-- daniel
Am 04.08.2012 21:52, schrieb Daniel Kinzler:
As far as I understand, a list of all streets of berlin is not
copyrightable at all
I mean not a raw list of street names but a Wikipedia list article like
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste der Straßen und Plätze in Berlin-Gesundbrunnen
...with various information like date of dedication, street length, meaning of the street name, description, link to image
Alex
On 04.08.2012 22:57, alexrk wrote:
Am 04.08.2012 21:52, schrieb Daniel Kinzler:
As far as I understand, a list of all streets of berlin is not copyrightable
at all
I mean not a raw list of street names but a Wikipedia list article like
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste der Straßen und Plätze in Berlin-Gesundbrunnen
...with various information like date of dedication, street length, meaning of the street name, description, link to image
As far as I understand, the article as a whole is copyrighted and licensed cc-by-sa, but each peace of information as such is not copyrighted and could be entered into Wikidata. The column "Anmerkungen" is probably already too much free text for that though. To copy that text, we'd at least need author and license info.
-- daniel
However, I believe this is irrelevant. Creative Commons version 3 does include database rights for those localized licenses in legislations implementing database rights (e.g. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/nl/legalcode http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/de/legalcode). They are included in the works, while at the same time, the license does waive any specific database rights to avoid database right proliferation.
This is not true everywhere, typically in France, database rights can not be addressed with CC licences (at least until version 4.0 is finished and translated)
Gregor
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l