My interest in a legal opinion is not to know if what they do is legal or
not.
My interest is to know for example what can they do if I copy the content
they previously have translated from an English Wikipedia article I have
previously written.
How do they put a dollar figure on the damages suffered if the income they
get from that content is obtained from my work they have translated without
my permission?
They only have my permission to publish derived works under same license.
Then I have the right to copy the derived works back. So any damage they
could claim is exactly the same damage I suffer for not being able to do
those copies.
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 01:11:25 -0700
> From: Ray Saintonge <saintonge(a)telus.net>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Turn the things the other way around
> "Baidu Baike copies content from Wikipedia without attribution"
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <4DB52CAD.8010808(a)telus.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> On 04/24/11 11:45 PM, Joan Goma wrote:
> > As Ray saids legal prosecution to claim for formal accomplishing of the
> > copyright terms is expensive and difficult. But the same happens the
> other
> > way around.
> >
> > I would like to have a clear legal opinion about applying the terms
> without
> > going to court.
> >
> > They have copied articles from Chinese Wikipedia and translated articles
> > from English and Japanese Wikipedia so in my opinion their work is a
> > derivative one and according to the CCSA terms it is also CCSA no mater
> what
> > they say.
> >
> > What about creating a bot to copy from Baidu all the articles not yet
> > existing in Chinese wikipedia.
> >
> > Could Geoff Brigham provide us his legal advice?
>
> Getting a legal opinion that what they are doing is illegal would be the
> easy part. The challenge is what can you do with that opinion once you
> have it.
>
> Copyright, and least in common law countries, is primarily an economic
> right. In that context courts would be more concerned with the measure
> of economic damage. How do you put a dollar figure on the damages
> suffered when the original authors weren't seeking to make money from
> it? Whoever starts the fight still needs to fund prosecuting the
> battle, and that could be very expensive.
>
> Ray
>
>
In a message dated 4/25/2011 9:34:16 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
jrgoma(a)gmail.com writes:
> My interest in a legal opinion is not to know if what they do is legal or
> not.
>
> My interest is to know for example what can they do if I copy the content
> they previously have translated from an English Wikipedia article I have
> previously written.
>
> How do they put a dollar figure on the damages suffered if the income they
> get from that content is obtained from my work they have translated
> without
> my permission?
>
> They only have my permission to publish derived works under same license.
> Then I have the right to copy the derived works back. So any damage they
> could claim is exactly the same damage I suffer for not being able to do
> those copies. >>
>
I don't believe you could make the case that individual contributors have
any standing to sue for copyright violations. Similarly, when you contribute
to the project, you are intrinsically giving up any rights you may think
you possess in what you have written. "Your permission" is a non-existent
entity in the case of what you give to Wikipedia.
Will Johnson
As Ray saids legal prosecution to claim for formal accomplishing of the
copyright terms is expensive and difficult. But the same happens the other
way around.
I would like to have a clear legal opinion about applying the terms without
going to court.
They have copied articles from Chinese Wikipedia and translated articles
from English and Japanese Wikipedia so in my opinion their work is a
derivative one and according to the CCSA terms it is also CCSA no mater what
they say.
What about creating a bot to copy from Baidu all the articles not yet
existing in Chinese wikipedia.
Could Geoff Brigham provide us his legal advice?
> Message: 5
> Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 15:18:51 -0700
> From: Ray Saintonge <saintonge(a)telus.net>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Letter to Baidu and press release "Baidu
> Baike copies content from Wikipedia without attribution" draft
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <4DB4A1CB.308(a)telus.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> On 04/24/11 9:35 AM, David Gerard wrote:
> > Baidu Baike clearly have a considerable potential liability in terms
> > of violation of copyright, including under Chinese law (assuming CC
> > by-sa holds up).
> >
> > If they're traded on the stock market in Hong Kong (or anywhere else)
> > - have they filed appropriate notices with the relevant financial
> > oversight bodies noting this outstanding potential liability? If not,
> > why not, and could they be in danger of penalties for not having done
> > so?
>
> Reading through this thread only reveals how thoroughly fucked up
> copyright law really is! The Baidu situation does point to a prima
> facie case of copyright infringement and blatant plagiarism, but we can
> do no better than the inhabitants of Flatland after their world was
> struck by a three-dimensional object. In theory the writers of
> collaborative material have a right of action against the infringers, or
> against those who violate the moral right of attribution. In practical
> terms, if the owner can be identified the costs prosecuting violations
> on the other side of the world are so far out of proportion to any
> potential maximum penalty as to turn any such action into a fool's
> errand, even in a class action. Nevertheless, when we apply the law to
> ourselves it's with such exactitude that we put ourselves in an
> immediate disadvantage.
>
> Ray
>
>
16,000,000 out of 3,000,000 articles sounds high to me, it would mean
over 500% of it was copyvio. Could that be individual edits?
Otherwise I suggest:
day mon, 2011
Wikipedia (http://www.wikipedia.org), a non-profit project run by the
Wikimedia Foundation, uses an open licence but with some terms.
The Chinese Wikipedia community welcomes the development of Baidu's
encyclopedia project Baidu Baike, as Baidu's efforts to build a
Chinese language encyclopaedia are complementary to Wikimedia's aims
to make the sum of human knowledge freely available to everyone in the
world. However, Baidu Baike has repeatedly violated the copyright of
Wikipedia. Wikipedians have complained many times but without result.
Baidu Baike started in April 2006, and now has more than 3 million
articles. However, Wikipedian's investigations indicate that more than
16,000,000<seems high should this be 160,000?> of the edits that
created these articles were copies from the Chinese Wikipedia or
translations from the English or Japanese versions of Wikipedia. These
copies and translations were done without complying with the licence
adopted by Wikipedia. This is a copyright violation against Wikipedia
editors, who write for free, asking only that their work remains free
and is attributed to them. So the contents of Wikipedia are available
to all under the CC-by-sa-3.0 and GDFL licences, including to Baidu.
But Baidu Baike doesn't comply with these licences, and claims
ownership of all content contributed to it with "? 2011 Baidu" stated
at the bottom of every page. As for attribution, according to some
users, even if all content is copied from
Wikipedia, Baidu' does not allow Wikipedia even to be listed as a
reference. When Wikipedians find people have copied and pasted content
from Baidu Baike into Wikipedia they quickly delete this as it
breaches Baidu's copyright. But Baidu Baike editors take insufficient
action when they see copyright violation. The terms of use of Baidu
Baike say the users who post material are responsible for the
copyright issues, but as the operator of Baidu Baike, Baidu should
also take responsibility to resolve this.
Therefore, the Chinese Wikipedia community has sent a letter again to
Baidu requesting them to take action, and has decided to escalate
matters by doing so publicly.
There is a great opportunity here for Baidu and its contributors.
Moving Baidu Baike to the CC-by-sa-3.0 licence would allow Wikipedia
and Baidu Baike to exchange content and attribute it to the original
authors. Users of Baidu Baike would have more confidence that the
material was legitimate, and writers who contribute to Baidu Baike
would know that their content could be translated into other language
versions of Wikipedia with attribution, just as Chinese Wikipedians
know that some of their writings are translated into other languages
but still attributed to them.
About Wikipedia
Wikipedia is an Encyclopaedia written by volunteers, and is the
largest project of the Wikimedia Foundation. "Imagine a world in which
every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge.
That's our commitment." This is how Jimmy Wales, the founder of
Wikipedia, explains the mission of Wikimedia.
About CC-by-sa-3.0 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CC-BY-SA-3.0
Press contact
Wikimedia Hong Kong: infowikimedia.hk Tango Chan: tango.chanwikimedia.hk +852
9063-2515
Wikimedia Taiwan: presswikimedia.tw Ted Chien: htchienwikimedia.tw
Chinese Wikipedia OTRS system: info-zhwikimedia.org
WSC
>
> ------------------------------
>
> English version
> ________________________________
>
> Baidu Baike copies content from Wikipedia without attribution
>
> ________________________________
>
>
> day mon, 2011
> Wikipedia (http://www.wikipedia.org), a non-profit project run by Wikimedia
> Foundation, uses an open licence but with some terms.
> The Chinese Wikipedia community is glad to see the development of Baidu's
> encyclopedia project called Baidu Baike, and Baidu's efforts to push forward the
> growing of knowledge around Chinese people, for Wikipedia also aims at making
> the sum of human's knowledge free to everyone in the world. However, Baidu Baike
> keeps violating the copyright of Wikipedia. Wikipedians have complained many
> times but without result.
> Baidu Baike started in April 2006, and has included 3 million more articles now.
> However, Wikipedian's investigation shows that among these articles more than
> 16,000,000 were copied from Chinese, English or Japenese Wikipedia, and were
> used in a way against the licence adopted by Wikipedia. This is a copyright
> violation to Wikipedia editors. Wikipedia releases its contents under
> CC-by-sa-3.0 and GDFL licences, while Baidu Baike doesn't claim to be using
> these licences, even with "? 2011 Baidu" stated at the bottom of the page. As
> for attribution, according to some users, even if all content is copied from
> Wikipedia, it is not allowed by Baidu's censorship to list Wikipedia as a
> reference. When Wikipedians encounter contents from Baidu Baike, they will
> delete them without delay, while Baidu Baike editors take no action when they
> see copyright violation. Although the terms of use of Baidu Baike sais the users
> who post it should be responsible for the copyright issues, but as the runner of
> Baidu Baike, Baidu is also inescapably liable for the such issues.
> Therefore, the Chinese Wikipedia community has sent a letter again to Baidu and
> requires them to take action. We hope that the modern media can give a report on
> this issue in order to let more people know about it.
> About Wikipedia
> Wikipedia is the largest project run by Wikimedia Foundation. "Imagine a world
> in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge.
> That's our commitment." This is how Jimmy Wales, the founder of Wikipedia,
> interprets the mission of Wikipedia.
> Press contact
> Wikimedia Hong Kong: infowikimedia.hk Tango Chan: tango.chanwikimedia.hk +852
> 9063-2515
> Wikimedia Taiwan: presswikimedia.tw Ted Chien: htchienwikimedia.tw
> Chinese Wikipedia OTRS system: info-zhwikimedia.org
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
> End of foundation-l Digest, Vol 85, Issue 49
> ********************************************
>
Dear all,
Sorry, but the article is out of update. According
to http://www.baidu.com/search/baike_help.html#百科协议 , Baidu Baike has changed to
use the Creative Commons BY-NC-ND. Also, it said:
* Use of non-commercial use should give the author name and Baidu Baike
* Use of commercial use should ask for author's permission, and state the author
name also Baidu Baike
* Use outside Baidu Baike must be the same meaning of the author, and also ask
for Baidu's permissions
So, I don't think that Baidu Baike will change their copyright notice and
Wikipedia will continue to mark them as copyvio. Due to this issues, the
copyright related page of Wikipedia is updating. However, the problem is they
copy the content from Wikipedia and ever from English and Japanese Wikipedia.
Search WP:BD and WP:BAIDU on Chinese Wikipedia for more details.
HW
Editor of Chinese Wikipedia
Hello, I'm Mono on the Wikimedia Commons.
I'm helping to
organize<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Picture_of_the_Year/2010/Committee>
of
the Fifth Annual Wikimedia Commons Picture of the
Year<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/COM:POTY/2010>.
In case you haven't heard about it, it's a contest where the featured
pictures selected from 2010 on the Wikimedia Commons are voted upon by the
community. Last year, a great deal of users participated, however, the
Wikimedia community landscape has changed, as many of our newer editors
aren't used to the Commons and haven't ever seen POTY play out. We'd like to
see an increase in participation from around our projects.
Because of this, I feel that it would be appropriate to post a global notice
for logged-in editors during the competition (there are two rounds; each one
lasts about a week) to encourage the broader community to participate. The
general consensus is that non-fundraising banners require community
consensus, so I'd like to get some feedback.
Finally, I would like to be the first to invite you to participate in the
contest...it is expected to occur in early May. Hopefully, you'll see a
global notice announcing the start of Round 1. Until then, the contest is
looking for help translating several messages into different languages over
at the translation
page<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2010/Translat…>
.
Best regards,
Mono
Attribution would be a step in the right direction, but are Baidu
Baike still claiming copyright over material on their site? I'm afraid
I don't read Chinese, but a usually reliable source says they do
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baidu_Baike#Copyright
Lots of people mirror or otherwise use content from Wikipedia, and
that's fine provided they comply with
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_Creative_Commons_Attribution…
and that includes having a compatible copyright.
Even if Baidu Baike attributes content correctly, it isn't acceptable
for them to claim ownership of content copied, translated or otherwise
derived from Wikipedia. They could of course change the copyright
status of pages that incorporate content from Wikipedia to CC by SA 3,
but if their site is anything like ours having incompatible copyright
on different pages would be messy. It would be much better for them to
change the copyright on their site to CC by SA 3.
WSC
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 13:16:47 +0900
> From: RYU Cheol <rcheol(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Baidu Baike & Wikipedia ????????? (??)
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <BANLkTi=mLWG-8rMR67Ff1FdbosLLtuS1Bg(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> RIght, WMF is not the copyright holder of articles as Free Software
> Foundation is not of GPLed source codes.
>
> Though WMF could give legal help for a Wikipedian to file a law suit or WMF
> could be an agent for the Wikipedian,
> WMF need to approach Baidu to discuss about attribution. I don't think Baidu
> has so much difficulties to do it.
>
> Cheol
>
> 2011/4/19 Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com>
>
>> 2011/4/19 Dana Lutenegger <dana.lutenegger(a)gmail.com>:
>> > Actually, I'm pretty sure that on paper, Chinese law forbids this kind of
>> > copying without attribution. The issue is whether or not it can be
>> enforced
>> > in practice. If it was strictly enforced, a lot of Baidu Baike and Hudong
>> > Wiki would have to be seriously retooled, so I doubt it. However, there
>> have
>> > been recent cases in which copyright infringement claims have been upheld
>> by
>> > Chinese courts, such as the infamous "Starbuck" coffee chain in Shanghai.
>> I
>> > think that our legal counsel should at least be in touch with Baidu on
>> this,
>> > and perhaps try to get them to take down the material, attribute it
>> > properly, or agree to the donation or apology letter ideas.
>>
>> The Starbuck case would be trademark infringement, not copyright, so
>> isn't a particularly useful precedent. I believe China has similar
>> copyright laws to the rest of the world, though (our article says they
>> have signed several international agreements on the subject:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property_in_the_People%27s_Republ…
>> ).
>>
>> Keep in mind, the WMF isn't the copyright holder, so there is a limit
>> to what the WMF's legal counsel can do. He could have a quiet word,
>> though, which could help.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
Dear all,
Some discussion about the Baidu Baike copy the content from Wikipedia is now on
Chinese Wikipedia Village Pump.
1.
http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:%E4%BA%92%E5%8A%A9%E5%AE%A2%E6%A0%88…
Some Baidu user copy a lot of content from Wikipedia, should them be prosecuted?
A user suggest that the Wikimedia Foundation prosecute the Baidu company and
request for remove or a large amount of money (donate to Wikimedia Foundation),
and have a advertisment on at least 10 newspaper/radio/TV for saying sorry to
Wikipedia.
2.
http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:%E4%BA%92%E5%8A%A9%E5%AE%A2%E6%A0%88…
About Baidu Baike
Some wikipedian said in China law, no clear solution can be make. Also, some
people advice the WMF to use the
http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:%E7%99%BE%E5%BA%A6%E7%99%BE%E7%A7%91… [list]
to prosecute or take action to Baidu company & Baidu Baike editor. I give a
comment that send a wikipedian-signed letter to Baidu and request them to take
action. Someone suggest that Wikimedia Taiwan to talk with the related
organization and try to solve the problem.
3. Talk about the "Is it possible to fund the Wikimedia China?"
Thank you for your attention.
HW
Editor of Chinese Wikipedia
----
Key words for wikizh-l people:
Baidu Baike = In Chinese 百度百科, the encyclopedia by a internet search website
Baidu, the no.1 website in China.
Wikimedia Taiwan = In Chinese 中華民國維基媒體協會, the wikimedia local assoication in
Taiwan. Approved by WMF
Village Pump = In Chinese 互助客棧
Wikimedia Foundation = In Chinese 維基媒體基金會