[Foundation-l] Copyright complaints
gerard.meijssen at gmail.com
Thu Feb 9 17:03:16 UTC 2006
The great thing of juriwiki-l is that it is in essence a big black hole.
Things get in there and it is not seen that something comes out. When it
comes to issues with licenses and issues to do with the implementation
of the rules many projects *choose* how to implement them. This results
in content that is inconsistent with the GFDL. This in turn results in
people telling organisations that use Wikipedia content that they cannot
use the content as is.
In my opinion, and I am not a lawyer, the license of the Wikimedia
project (GFDL) states that everything that is included in the projects
needs to be available under this license. When people license things
under a license that is more Free, that is fine, but it needs to allow
for GFDL publication.
My question to the nice people that are also on the juriwiki-l am I
correct in what I just said.
Patrick, Brad wrote:
> You would be mistaken to conclude that the Foundation does not regard
> copyvio as significant. Rather, your choice of venue for discussion,
> i.e., Foundation-L, is not the most productive. Juriwiki-L is the place
> where hot copyvio action may be found more readily.
> Please contact me offline to discuss particulars.
> Bradford A. Patrick, Esq.
> Fowler White Boggs Banker
> 501 E. Kennedy Blvd.
> Suite 1700
> Tampa, FL 33602-5239
> (813) 228-7411 main
> (813) 222-3336 direct
> (813) 229-8313 fax
> bpatrick at fowlerwhite.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: foundation-l-bounces at wikimedia.org
> [mailto:foundation-l-bounces at wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Kim Bruning
> Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 11:34 AM
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Copyright complaints
> On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 06:12:04PM +0100, Kim Bruning wrote:
>> This is important for wikipolitical reasons on en.wikipedia. If I
>> lose, my right honerable opposition shall likely successfully
>> endeavour to severely reduce copyright checks on the english
> The lack of response is deafening! :-P
> I guess I was mistaken. :-( I take it that copyright issues and
> incorrect use of fair use provisions are NOT a concern for the
> foundation at this moment in time?
> Due to the fact that copyright and fairuse checking is seen as
> disruptive on en.wikipedia, I suppose that priority must then be given
> to the community. I shall concede this point to my opposition, and
> request for copyright checks on en.wikipedia to be curtailed.
> Kim Bruning
More information about the foundation-l