On 5/12/06, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/12/06, Steve Bennett <stevage(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
On 5/12/06, Steve Block
<steve.block(a)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.
http://www.answers.com/baidu
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