http://www.justrec.com/wilderness.html
This is just one of several articles on this site that appears to be a direct copy of the WP article. Scouting is another. They claim copyright on the page and do not mention WP. Is this legit?
Brian
On 1/20/07, Brian Salter-Duke b_duke@bigpond.net.au wrote:
http://www.justrec.com/wilderness.html
This is just one of several articles on this site that appears to be a direct copy of the WP article. Scouting is another. They claim copyright on the page and do not mention WP. Is this legit?
Brian
Brian Salter-Duke b_duke@bigpond.net.au [[User:Bduke]] mainly on en:Wikipedia. Also on fr: Wikipedia, Meta-Wiki and WikiversityThis is generaly delt with at :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mirrors_and_forks
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 03:25:09AM +0000, geni wrote:
On 1/20/07, Brian Salter-Duke b_duke@bigpond.net.au wrote:
http://www.justrec.com/wilderness.html
This is just one of several articles on this site that appears to be a direct copy of the WP article. Scouting is another. They claim copyright on the page and do not mention WP. Is this legit?
Brian
This is generaly delt with at : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mirrors_and_forks
Thanks. I have done that. However I can not follow it through as I currently do not have access to "whois" and I can not find a contact for this web page. Could someone do a whois on www.justrec.com for me? Thanks.
Brian.
-- geni
On 1/20/07, Brian Salter-Duke b_duke@bigpond.net.au wrote:
http://www.justrec.com/wilderness.html
This is just one of several articles on this site that appears to be a direct copy of the WP article. Scouting is another. They claim copyright on the page and do not mention WP. Is this legit?
When this came up a few months ago, we concluded that it was not illegal to falsely claim copyright. It doesn't make their claim valid, but it's certainly easier for many sites to simply claim copyright over everything appearing on their site than to work out which part of that claim would actually be valid.
Steve
Steve Bennett wrote:
On 1/20/07, Brian Salter-Duke b_duke@bigpond.net.au wrote:
http://www.justrec.com/wilderness.html
This is just one of several articles on this site that appears to be a direct copy of the WP article. Scouting is another. They claim copyright on the page and do not mention WP. Is this legit?
When this came up a few months ago, we concluded that it was not illegal to falsely claim copyright. It doesn't make their claim valid, but it's certainly easier for many sites to simply claim copyright over everything appearing on their site than to work out which part of that claim would actually be valid.
Falsely claiming copyrright is illegal, but prosecutions are not practical.
Claiming copyright over an entire web page is not a false claim. It really means "copyright to whatever extent allowable"
Ec
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 02:57:04PM +1100, Steve Bennett wrote:
On 1/20/07, Brian Salter-Duke b_duke@bigpond.net.au wrote:
http://www.justrec.com/wilderness.html
This is just one of several articles on this site that appears to be a direct copy of the WP article. Scouting is another. They claim copyright on the page and do not mention WP. Is this legit?
When this came up a few months ago, we concluded that it was not illegal to falsely claim copyright. It doesn't make their claim valid, but it's certainly easier for many sites to simply claim copyright over everything appearing on their site than to work out which part of that claim would actually be valid.
Steve
This is pretty new to me. This site has all its substantial content taken from Wikipedia, yet it claims to have copyright on it. I do not think that is right. I have flagged it on the appropriate pages on WP and I have finally tracked down the details of the site. I will e-mail them tomorrow. Right now I'm off to bed having been on the turps.
Cheers, Brian.
On 20/01/07, Brian Salter-Duke b_duke@bigpond.net.au wrote:
This is pretty new to me. This site has all its substantial content taken from Wikipedia, yet it claims to have copyright on it. I do not think that is right. I have flagged it on the appropriate pages on WP and I have finally tracked down the details of the site. I will e-mail them tomorrow. Right now I'm off to bed having been on the turps.
The copyrights are owned by the contributors. Each and every one would be able to write to the site asking that the site stop violating their copyright and falsely claiming copyright - either by taking the articles down, or by making clear the articles' availability under GFDL. Preferably the second.
Is the copyright in your work being violated? You can write to them concerning this. Or call. Or fax., Or all of these.
- d.
Yeah sure. It's easier but that doesn't make it "not illegal". Claiming copyright on something that isn't yours is about as illegal as it can get. They should comply to the GFDL whether it's easy or not.
Mgm
On 1/20/07, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
On 1/20/07, Brian Salter-Duke b_duke@bigpond.net.au wrote:
http://www.justrec.com/wilderness.html
This is just one of several articles on this site that appears to be a direct copy of the WP article. Scouting is another. They claim copyright on the page and do not mention WP. Is this legit?
When this came up a few months ago, we concluded that it was not illegal to falsely claim copyright. It doesn't make their claim valid, but it's certainly easier for many sites to simply claim copyright over everything appearing on their site than to work out which part of that claim would actually be valid.
Steve
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l