On 5/11/06, Anthony DiPierro <wikilegal(a)inbox.org> wrote:
Maybe (if I answered that I'd really be giving
legal advice). But if
you took 10 different lists of 50 co-ordinates and put them in one
list, then picked the 20 or so that you find interesting from that big
list (maybe even reducing the number of significant digits in the
coordinates first), it might be less likely to be a derivative (I
still would feel uncomfortable giving a direct yes or no answer,
And if 20 different people working independently each pick one
co-ordinate, that might not constitute copying or preparation of a
Between copying one and copying the whole list, it's pretty grey area.
Even copying the whole list is grey area.
In this case, it's not necessarily a question of "lists" per se. On
the original website, each monolithic site is a subpage, and has a GPS
coordinate amongst other info. In the wikipedia article, we have a few
different sites listed, not as a "list" but sorted by type, with text
and so forth. I would simply want to add the relevant coordinates (if
useful) for those sites that we already have listed.
Yeah, it does seem like pretty reasonable research doesn't it. Even if
they would complain that they went to all the effort of looking up the
coordinates on a map.