Karl Eichwalder wrote:
Andre Engels <andreengels(a)gmail.com> writes:
That's clearly something for the case where a
copyrighted piece is
*added* to an article. Not that I would agree to it for wholly new
copyright violations either. I still see no reason for dumping
additional paragraphs as well.
As long as someone can claim the additional paragraphs are "derived"
from the copyvio, you would better remove the additional paragraphs as
early as possible.
Anybody can "claim" anything. That does not make it so. The
information is not copyright. Only the way of expressing it is
copyright. Thus if someone uses all the information from a copyright
source, but tells it in his own way that work may be derived from the
original but it is not legally a derivative work. Rewriting the
material would be more appropriate.
Ec