On 5/12/06, Kirill Lokshin kirill.lokshin@gmail.com wrote:
On 5/12/06, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
On 5/12/06, Steve Block steve.block@myrealbox.com wrote:
If they are and they aren't citing authors, aren't they in breach of the GFDL. And if that's the case, can we sue? Please?
Our thoroughly NPOV article on it seems to indicate that they are in breach of GFDL. What damages could we demonstrate though?
Probably none at all; and we're hardly likely to get an injunction of any sort against them, given the circumstances.
It might still be worth making as loud a fuss as possible about this -- though not necessarily suing them -- merely for the PR effects.
Answers Corporation isn't citing authors. And right at the bottom of the page it says "Copyright (c) 2006 Answers Corporation. All rights reserved." Wikimedia isn't making a fuss about them. In fact, they're making business deals with them.
I think people seem to be missing the point. Sure, Baidu might be in technical violation of the GFDL, in which case pretty much every fork/mirror in the world is in technical violation of it. I was more focussed on the fact that "entries on Baidupedia, the service from Nasdaq-listed Baidu.com launched last month, are censored by the Chinese Government". This is especially horrible because the real Wikipedia *isn't accessible in China* to the average internet user who doesn't jump through a bunch of technical hoops.
Anthony