I'd like to have access to a tarball of the Wikipedia. Larry mentioned Jason
as being the one to set up the cron jobs, so I'm copying him FWIW.
A couple details haven't been discussed:
1. When the tarball becomes available, I assume it'll be a link from the
appropriate Wikpedia page? I'd propose at least HomePage. Maybe
Wikipedia_FAQ. And how about a page devoted to the tarball. Say, [[Wikipedia
Snapshot]]? See
2. It wasn't discussed whether all versions would be archived or not. That,
of course, is ideal. But it will grow ''ad infiniutum.'' (''ad nauseum''?
:-) I think it's essential for the historical record to archive all
revisions, but I think there should also be a "snapshot" tarball of only the
latest version of each article. It would be considerably smaller and
wouldn't grow as fast as the full archive. If that was done, then there
could be a page called [[Wikipedia Archives]] that had links to both
tarballs.
<>< [[Tbc]]
Hey Jason,
Have a look at what Dan Keshet says, about 2/3 the way down this page:
http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Larry_Sanger/An_impending_scalability_problem
It would make lots of people happy if we would copy his code to Wikipedia's
current implementation (without having to upgrade to Cliff's latest
version). It would help with scaleability.
Larry
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160
Robert Bihlmeyer <robbe(a)orcus.priv.at> wrote:
>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>It has been signed conforming to RFC2015.
>You'll need PGP or GPG to check the signature.
Cute, but is it really necessary to sign messages for this little
list? Besides, my mail client (Microflaccid Outlook Express)
doesn't like the RFC2015 format, so I have to read all your
messages raw. To add insult to injury, I can't even verify your
signature with my plain gpg tool because it's not the canonical
ascii-armored format.
I'm posting this publicly so others can see they're not the only
one. (Or maybe I am, in which case, I will cower and stop
complaining. :-)
>...if the links to Amazon are kept, I suggest that they use the
>Amazon Honor System...I'd expect Bomis to earmark the money for
>the hosting & maintaining costs of wikipedia...
Excellent idea. I agree completely.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (MingW32) - WinPT 0.3.2
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org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=+qE5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
[Just going to silly extremes to prove a point. The e-mail is message is
signed with my key for tbchambers(a)yahoo.com. My public key is on the
http://wwwkeys.us.pgp.net/ server.]
Jimmy Wales <jwales(a)bomis.com> writes:
> Gareth Owen wrote:
> > Thanks a lot. He died in 1925, so if I understand
> > http://www.loc.gov/copyright/circs/circ1.html#hlc correctly, the very latest
> > it would be in copyright is last year, so they're fair game. Correct?
>
> It seems hard to say, based on my reading of this thing.
>
> It seems that "Public Law 105-298, enacted on October 27, 1998, further
> extended the renewal term of copyrights still subsisting on that date by an
> additional 20 years, providing for a renewal term of 67 years and a total
> term of protection of 95 years."
>
> So if it was published in 1908, then it seems that if the renewals were done
> timely, there could be copyright protection until 2003.
If 1908 is the start date, 75 years of copyright lapsed in 1983 and Public Law
105-298 is irrelevant. If 1925 (authors death) is the start PL105-298 does
apply, and we can't use it till 2020.
Of course, Rouse-Ball was a Briton, saw it possible that the distinctions
between US and International copyright law are relevant.
--
Gareth Owen
>I think this is probably a question for LDC. :-)
Actually, I think you need a real lawyer for this one. Yes, the
copyright should have expired under the original act, but the Sonny
Bono extension or DMCA may have extended it. If the book is
published by a company that still exists, it is they who will enforce
the copyright, if any, so look for the publisher. If you do assume
that the work is out of copyright and use it, all that is likely to
happen is that the present rights owner may ask that we remove it,
and we will have to do so (assuming the copyright is in fact valid).
Last month I would have added "it's not like anyone ever presses
criminal charges for copyright violation...", but that was before
Sklyarov.
>Nupedia is a separate project. A distinct group of entries require
>knowledge from different fields. I was just thinking how it can be
tackled.
well, so I did misunderstand you.
>> way of entries. How would it be implemented, though? I'm just leery
>> of suggestions to impose structure on wikipedia.
>To propagate appeals for collaboration in special kinds of pages in
>national wikipedias and in 'Recent Changes' pages on all wikipedias
>we all read 'Recent Changes' by habit, don't we ?
And again. I'm on a roll. I thought you were calling for a top-down
organization, not a self-governing one.0
I'm not sure. The DMCA provided for an extension of copyright for
everything under copyright in the U.S. at the time it was signed into
law. So there's that--it may have been under copyright still. Also,
if he Ball never registered for copyright, there's this: (from the
same website), under "Works Originally Created before January 1, 1978,
But Not Published or Registered by That Date" :
These works have been automatically brought under the statute and are
now given federal copyright protection. ... The law provides that in
no case will the term of copyright for works in this category expire
before December 31, 2002," etc.
I think this is probably a question for LDC. :-)
>Thanks a lot. He died in 1925, so if I understand
>http://www.loc.gov/copyright/circs/circ1.html#hlc correctly, the very
latest
>it would be in copyright is last year, so they're fair game. Correct?
>
>--
>Gareth Owen
>[Wikipedia-l]
>To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
>http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>0
I Wrote:
>http://www.loc.gov/copyright/guide.html might put you on the right
>track, but it only has new copyrights and transfers of copyright since
>1978. also the interface BLOWS, even for telnet. forget about
>backspace, of course, but it does't even display you're typing.
>amazing. so no ^H^H^H^H^H for you. I did not find it. it might
>help, though, to know if "rouse ball" is his last name or "ball," also
>what the "w. w." stands for. (though I *thought* I tried all
>permutations.)
Walter William Rouse Ball :
http://www-groups.dcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Ball.html0