Hi
The board has received a mail concerning the german wikiquote. The issue has been ongoing for ... a very long time now.... but to summarize it,
''By the german law, every cite is normaly copyrighted.''
In the past, Erich Kästner allready claimed against people quoting him with success. The only way out of this problem would be, to cite them all in a context about every cite - in the moment we still have only less then the half with an source, so this would also be impossible. I dunno how much is the chance, to get claimed. Maybe someone is translation the "Rechtsgutachten" from the german wikimedia e.V. for a solution. (Quotes from poesie, books or small lyrics are high difficult, quotes from Dieter Bohlen are less in trouble)''
This is reported by Michael Diederich.
Michael is wondering what to do, in particular since a german editor is asking that the whole wikiquote be deleted.
Any suggestion to help on the topic ?
ant
Well we Japanese Wikiquotians have the same problem; no cite without context is legally allowed.
On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 09:45:30 +0100, Anthere anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
Any suggestion to help on the topic ?
If de.wp would like to have those quotes survive, in my opinion, give them context; describe how those quotes would be esteemed, in what context they have been quoted, what context they had originally, and so on and so on.
Perhaps they woudl get a sort of commentary and then the problem is if it would be what they want to have (personally I don't like it -I prefer a reciprocity of quotation with minimum commentary and that is one of reason Japanese Wikiquote hasn't chosen this way).
P.S. how do you think we have a new mailinglist dedicated for wikiquote?
Aphaia wrote:
Well we Japanese Wikiquotians have the same problem; no cite without context is legally allowed.
On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 09:45:30 +0100, Anthere anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
Any suggestion to help on the topic ?
If de.wp would like to have those quotes survive, in my opinion, give them context; describe how those quotes would be esteemed, in what context they have been quoted, what context they had originally, and so on and so on.
Perhaps they woudl get a sort of commentary and then the problem is if it would be what they want to have (personally I don't like it -I prefer a reciprocity of quotation with minimum commentary and that is one of reason Japanese Wikiquote hasn't chosen this way).
What EXACTLY does the law in these countries say? Are there any references to how the courts in these countries have interpreted such laws? Someone said that books of famous quotations are sold in Germany. How could that be in a country with such a strict law about quotations?
Laws may very well restrict our activities, but there should be no obligation to interpret them in the most restrictive way. When a particular law gives a ridiculous result, that is the time to see if there are legal arguments available for interpretations that are more favorable.
Ec
On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 09:45:30 +0100, Anthere anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
What EXACTLY does the law in these countries say?
According to the Japanese Copyright Law, a fair quotation (公正な引用) should fulfil two conditions: 1) quotation should be shorter than the text of the author who makes that quote (so here the current Wikiquote style can't filfile this condition. There is almost no "background" text for quotations) 2) quotation should be used in a context which has necessity to make that quote
and there is a court sentence for a mere quotation book of copyrighted sources without permissions of copyright holders; the publisher of this book was judged as copyright law infringement.
Laws may very well restrict our activities, but there should be no obligation to interpret them in the most restrictive way.
There is already an established analysis by the court and I have no intention to attempt if we have a different luck. There are many quotation sites on the net but anyway they are non commercial use - under GFDL the situation is different, if I understand correctly.
When a particular law gives a ridiculous result, that is the time to see if there are legal arguments available for interpretations that are more favorable.
Do you think we have already attempt it? And I don't think it is not rediculous - Wikiquote in the current style can't be sufficient both conditions Japaense law demands obviously. In other words, to correct quotations of copyrighted stuffs as bunchs of quotations without no contexts, at least under the Japanese law, we need to get permissions from each copyright holders. Or It seems to be a violation of right of editing, a sort of derivetive works in this context. -- Aphaea@*.wikipedia.org email: Aphaia @ gmail (dot) com
Laws may very well restrict our activities, but there should be no obligation to interpret them in the most restrictive way. When a particular law gives a ridiculous result, that is the time to see if there are legal arguments available for interpretations that are more favorable.
Not just that. May I remind people that German is not just spoken in Germany. Austria, Liechtenstein and Switzerland come to mind. So if it is not allowed under German law, but is under their law we could always make a writ that the de.wikiquote is meant for country xxx .
Walter/Waerth
Walter van Kalken wrote:
Not just that. May I remind people that German is not just spoken in Germany. Austria, Liechtenstein and Switzerland come to mind. So if it is not allowed under German law, but is under their law we could always make a writ that the de.wikiquote is meant for country xxx .
Not to mention that German is spoken by a non-zero number of people in the United States, where the servers are hosted and where such collections of quotes are legal... (The same is true of Japanese and most other languages.)
-Mark
Walter van Kalken wrote:
Laws may very well restrict our activities, but there should be no obligation to interpret them in the most restrictive way. When a particular law gives a ridiculous result, that is the time to see if there are legal arguments available for interpretations that are more favorable.
Not just that. May I remind people that German is not just spoken in Germany. Austria, Liechtenstein and Switzerland come to mind. So if it is not allowed under German law, but is under their law we could always make a writ that the de.wikiquote is meant for country xxx .
I'm learning German, and I live in the US.
The issue of which laws of which jurisdictions we need to worry about, and to what degree, is a very complex one with no simple formulaic answers. For example, I think it is a good thing that the German wikipedia is quite strict against fair use, because most re-users of that work will be trying to distribute it in Germany, and relying on the more liberal provisions of fair use/fair dealing that en.wikipedia relies on would be unwise.
On the other hand, if something about German law made it impossible to have a legal redistribution of Wikipedia in German *no matter what* then we'd just have to ignore the law and build Wikipedia anyway, knowing that redistribution within Germany will be problematic.
In the case of Wikiquote, I need to study the issue more carefully, but I generally agree that the mere fact that redistributing the work (or hosting it on servers in Germany) is problematic is no reason for us to shut it down. It's perfectly legal where it is.
At the same time, I think what we need to do is think really hard about how to do what we want to do, within the confines of the law. For example, it has been said that we can't quote "without context" -- ok, let's get a sense of what that means in reality. What legal arguments do German versions of Bartlett's rely on? What kind of context need we supply?
Maybe the solution is that de.wikiquote has to be a lot more strict about detailed attribution and contextualization of quotes -- fine.
--Jimbo
Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales wrote:
For example, I think it is a good thing that the German wikipedia is quite strict against fair use, because most re-users of that work will be trying to distribute it in Germany, and relying on the more liberal provisions of fair use/fair dealing that en.wikipedia relies on would be unwise.
Is that really a good reason for this difference? You could make the same argument for removing fair-use from en: as well, because there are many English-speaking countries that have laws as restrictive as.(or more restrictive than) Germany's.
-Mark
Delirium wrote:
For example, I think it is a good thing that the German wikipedia is quite strict against fair use, because most re-users of that work will be trying to distribute it in Germany, and relying on the more liberal provisions of fair use/fair dealing that en.wikipedia relies on would be unwise.
Is that really a good reason for this difference? You could make the same argument for removing fair-use from en: as well, because there are many English-speaking countries that have laws as restrictive as.(or more restrictive than) Germany's.
These things are judgment calls which I think have to be made carefully, and there will be no simple formulaic answer. Because of the _way_ that we make decisions (i.e. with a fair amount of autonnomy for different languages, and with efforts to find consensus rather than hard-and-fast rules of voting or whatever), we will sometimes find ourselves being inconsistent in some minor ways.
As a matter of fact, I *do* make the same argument for removing fair-use from en as well. I think we should avoid fair-use images much much more strongly than we do now.
At the same time, I think that fair use is a *good thing* in general, because it is an acknowledgement that there are limitations on the rights of copyright holders, and we should use it when we really do need it.
--Jimbo
On 3 wikis I got today the message
You are autoblocked because your IP is on a list named SORB ..... who did that ???? Whose idea was that ???? I got blocked on ia, li and lo whose brilliant idea was this. Am I deliberately being chased away on all wikis now????
Waerth
Walter van Kalken wrote:
On 3 wikis I got today the message
You are autoblocked because your IP is on a list named SORB ..... who did that ???? Whose idea was that ???? I got blocked on ia, li and lo whose brilliant idea was this. Am I deliberately being chased away on all wikis now????
Brion on IRC:
brion irc://irc.freenode.net/brion,isnickwell, it might be because people hate *you* specifically. or it might be because ongoing anti-spam efforts are being experimented with, because this issue is much bigger than you personally.
I demand this experiment be stopped now
Waerth
Walter van Kalken a écrit:
Walter van Kalken wrote:
On 3 wikis I got today the message
You are autoblocked because your IP is on a list named SORB ..... who did that ???? Whose idea was that ???? I got blocked on ia, li and lo whose brilliant idea was this. Am I deliberately being chased away on all wikis now????
Brion on IRC:
brion irc://irc.freenode.net/brion,isnickwell, it might be because people hate *you* specifically. or it might be because ongoing anti-spam efforts are being experimented with, because this issue is much bigger than you personally.
I beg to differ. Waerth is quite confortable.
I demand this experiment be stopped now
Waerth
I think they are currently looking at that...
Walter van Kalken wrote:
On 3 wikis I got today the message
You are autoblocked because your IP is on a list named SORB ..... who did that ???? Whose idea was that ???? I got blocked on ia, li and lo whose brilliant idea was this. Am I deliberately being chased away on all wikis now????
Walter's ISP runs an open web proxy; this means that everybody in the world can use it as a shield for attacking various web sites (including us).
We're working on making the spam-blocking and vandalism-blocking less painful, though whapping this lame-brained ISP with a big cluestick would help too.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
For now my problem seems solved. I wonder a couple of things though .......
1) For how long, as I get a new IP address slapped on by my provider every 24 hours. 2) How many people are still blocked because of this and do not speak english and do now know where to complain 3) How many people wanted to start editting today on th.wikipedia and other wikipedia's and have we lost.
Walter / Waerth
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia%3ALe_Bistro#Utilisateur:Montaia_...
A french editor, Montaia, would also like to be unblocked.
Thanks for anyone who could help her. I told her to register to wikitech-l.
ant
seems solved. I wonder a couple of things though .......
- For how long, as I get a new IP address slapped on by my provider
every 24 hours. 2) How many people are still blocked because of this and do not speak english and do now know where to complain 3) How many people wanted to start editting today on th.wikipedia and other wikipedia's and have we lost.
Walter / Waerth
Which I think shows that there is a PROBLEM here. Waerth is complaining, Montaia is asking, but who knows how many contributors and potential contributors are simply giving up, or have no idea where to ask?
Andre Engels
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 07:25:43 +0200, Anthere anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia%3ALe_Bistro#Utilisateur:Montaia_...
A french editor, Montaia, would also like to be unblocked.
Thanks for anyone who could help her. I told her to register to wikitech-l.
Andre Engels wrote:
Which I think shows that there is a PROBLEM here. Waerth is complaining, Montaia is asking, but who knows how many contributors and potential contributors are simply giving up, or have no idea where to ask?
Almost all of our bot-driven vandalism and spam comes from open proxies. And the same open proxies are often used for email, IRC and IM spam. The SORBS list only contains proxies which have been used for email spam, so next time you see a complaint, think of all the spam you may have received from that person. I'd rather encourage the people who run these servers to secure them, and only unblock them as a last resort. It's in Wikipedia's interests, as well as the interests of the general Internet community.
-- Tim Starling
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 23:40:47 +1000, Tim Starling t.starling@physics.unimelb.edu.au wrote:
Almost all of our bot-driven vandalism and spam comes from open proxies. And the same open proxies are often used for email, IRC and IM spam. The SORBS list only contains proxies which have been used for email spam, so next time you see a complaint, think of all the spam you may have received from that person. I'd rather encourage the people who run these servers to secure them, and only unblock them as a last resort. It's in Wikipedia's interests, as well as the interests of the general Internet community.
I don't agree. In my opinion, it is more in Wikipedia's interest to have contributors for Wikipedia than to have people complain about email spam.
Andre Engels
Tim Starling (t.starling@physics.unimelb.edu.au) [050330 23:43]:
Andre Engels wrote:
Which I think shows that there is a PROBLEM here. Waerth is complaining, Montaia is asking, but who knows how many contributors and potential contributors are simply giving up, or have no idea where to ask?
Almost all of our bot-driven vandalism and spam comes from open proxies. And the same open proxies are often used for email, IRC and IM spam. The SORBS list only contains proxies which have been used for email spam, so next time you see a complaint, think of all the spam you may have received from that person. I'd rather encourage the people who run these servers to secure them, and only unblock them as a last resort. It's in Wikipedia's interests, as well as the interests of the general Internet community.
Has anyone had a chance to look at bug 550? It's specifically so that this sort of block will only hit anon users.
- d.
David Gerard wrote:
Has anyone had a chance to look at bug 550? It's specifically so that this sort of block will only hit anon users.
I've told the list before that the spammers already have software to log in to wikis, and the vandals log in whenever it's convenient for them. In a previous post, I even gave details of vandalbot attacks by logged in users. But I guess you won't believe me that it's useless until you see it. I already had an exemption in place for non-newbies, I've replaced this with an exemption for all logged-in users.
-- Tim Starling
On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 01:23:56 +1000, Tim Starling t.starling@physics.unimelb.edu.au wrote:
David Gerard wrote:
Has anyone had a chance to look at bug 550? It's specifically so that this sort of block will only hit anon users.
I've told the list before that the spammers already have software to log in to wikis, and the vandals log in whenever it's convenient for them. In a previous post, I even gave details of vandalbot attacks by logged in users. But I guess you won't believe me that it's useless until you see it. I already had an exemption in place for non-newbies, I've replaced this with an exemption for all logged-in users.
Tim please don't. We already had a bot page move attacked on sq: (from [[w:sq:User:Biskota]]). I happened to be online at the time (only two admins on sq, about 5 regular users), and still it took me and another contributor a good 20 minutes to clean up all the page moves. If I hadn't been online the only good way to fix it would have been a db restore. We were also lucky that it wasn't using a proxy, but it's the next logical step for an attacker.
Page move and edit throttling for newbie users would also be tremendously useful (maybe it can be put in 1.5 since the schema is changing).
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 23:40:47 +1000, Tim Starling t.starling@physics.unimelb.edu.au wrote:
I'd rather encourage the people who run these servers to secure them, and only unblock them as a last resort. It's in Wikipedia's interests, as well as the interests of the general Internet community.
Sure, but it's against the interests of our well-meaning contibutors who, for whatever reason, aren't on as secure an ISP. There is great peril in imposing restrictions on some and claiming that it's "for the greater good," as I'd hope history has taught us all.
Waerth, what is the name and contact email of your ISP? There are quite a few ppl on this list, and it certainly wouldnt hurt for your ISP to recieve a bunch of emails complaining about thier open proxy. Sure maybe it will do nothing, but then again, maybe it might just yeild good results. Maybe an officialish letter from the foundation could also be sent. And anyway, telling ppl that they are on the SORBS list and urging them to clean up thier act, has to be better than just blocking them.
Also, would it be possible to ban all users (logged-in included) on the SORBS list, then make a white list which any admin would be able to edit? (And obviously put a note on the "You are blocked cause you are on the SORBS list page" of how to apply to get onto the whitelist.)
~~~~
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:55:48 +0700, Walter van Kalken walter@vankalken.net wrote:
On 3 wikis I got today the message
You are autoblocked because your IP is on a list named SORB ..... who did that ???? Whose idea was that ???? I got blocked on ia, li and lo whose brilliant idea was this. Am I deliberately being chased away on all wikis now????
Waerth
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Robin Shannon wrote:
Waerth, what is the name and contact email of your ISP? There are quite a few ppl on this list, and it certainly wouldnt hurt for your ISP to recieve a bunch of emails complaining about thier open proxy. Sure maybe it will do nothing, but then again, maybe it might just yeild good results. Maybe an officialish letter from the foundation could also be sent. And anyway, telling ppl that they are on the SORBS list and urging them to clean up thier act, has to be better than just blocking them.
Also, would it be possible to ban all users (logged-in included) on the SORBS list, then make a white list which any admin would be able to edit? (And obviously put a note on the "You are blocked cause you are on the SORBS list page" of how to apply to get onto the whitelist.)
Here are the names as listed on the APnic database: It is Asia infonet. If writing please leave any references to my name out of there. I might find myself disconnected otherwise.
*person*: Wongchai Piyakavarnich address: 17 th floor ,Fortune House address: 1 Ratchadaphisek Road, Din Daeng address: Bangkok 10320 country: TH phone: +662-6411800 ext 4794 fax-no: +662-6411831 e-mail: cmsv@asianet.co.th
*person*: Supachai Kitwongpak address: 17 th floor, Fortune House address: 1 Ratchadaphisek Road, Din Daeng address: Bangkok 10320 country: TH phone: +66-2-641-1800 fax-no: +66-2-642-1540 e-mail: kitwongp@asianet.co.th e-mail: kitwongp@asianet.co.th
e-mail: cmsv@asianet.co.th
Walter
In today's paper their was an article about True internet. The daughter of asianet handling ADSL connections. Asianet itself handles dialup.
Some exerpts from it:
"True's ADSL broadband Internet service has about 20,000 corporate users and more than 200,000 individual users, representing around 80 per cent of Thailand's broadband Internet market."
So wikipedia is currently blocking 80 percent of all Thai broadband users.
"Earlier this month, True said its total number of broadband subscribers would reach 500,000 this year, and revenue from its broadband Internet service would double to almost Bt3 billion."
So we would be blocking half a million Thais by the end of the year!! And that is just Broadband. Their Dialup members are a multiple of this!!!
For the article see: http://www.komchadluek.net/breaking/read.php?lang=en&newsid=52375
Walter
Walter van Kalken wrote:
So we would be blocking half a million Thais by the end of the year!! And that is just Broadband. Their Dialup members are a multiple of this!!!
We're not going to be doing anything of the sort. I told you last night on IRC that a technical solution had been found, and that if you'd just wait a few days for me to implement it, the problem would go away. I admire your dedication to your cause if not your patience. This solution has now been implemented. I'll give the details in a wikipedia-l post.
-- Tim Starling
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org