On 17 June 2014 17:53, Delirium <delirium(a)hackish.org> wrote:
educational and other uses, by Wikimedians and third
parties. If it's not an
open-content encyclopedia, for example if Wikipedia articles make use of
provincial American copyright loopholes that render them illegal to
redistribute here in Denmark, imo it has failed in its educational mission.
We already do this, and it's been going on for a decade.
The English Wikipedia is stuffed full of text added under a "pre 1923
so public domain" basis, which of course is a complete minefield
anywhere else in the world. Some of it is tagged, some of it isn't
See, for example, the 12000+ pages (often very prominent) in
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_articles_incorporating_tex…
Some of this is PD in most of the world (assuming life+70). Some
isn't. We cheerfully warrant it all to be CC-BY-SA...
(In practice, I think this is reasonably de minimis. The amount of
material that survives is relatively small in many articles, and I've
even removed a few EB1911 tags when it's been written out entirely.
But it's interesting to compare this with the way we handle Commons
material.)
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk