[Foundation-l] Copies of Wikipedia's articles found on Knol

teun spaans teun.spaans at gmail.com
Thu Jul 31 07:34:37 UTC 2008

I just checked a few of the knol links supplied at the start of this thread
and some of them have been deleted or withdrawn by their publishers.

On 7/31/08, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <cimonavaro at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thomas Dalton wrote:
> >> I can't see how content distributed under the licenses Knol offers can
> >> be reproduced in WMF projects, and I can't see how content produced
> >> under WMF's licensing options can be reproduced in Knol.  To me, that
> >> raises a serious problem.
> >>
> >
> > Could you explain that? My understanding was that something released
> > under CC-BY could be used pretty much anywhere as long as it's
> > appropriately attributed. We attribute all content on Wikipedia, so
> > why can't we use it? (The other direction obviously can't be done,
> > there's no dispute there, as far as I can see.)
> >
> >
> Uhm. I fail to see how that is obvious. So there obviously
> is a dispute (that you didn't foresee ;)
> Wholesale use of wikimedias content isn't _easily_ feasible
> on knol. I would say impossible, even.
> Individual contributions have a more nuanced situation,
> where there are differing origins of the content.
> Consider a case where a contributor has prior to editing
> their content into wikipedia, already entered their
> content into Public Domain. We do not as far as I know
> disallow use of text that has entered into the Public
> Domain, else we wouldn't have incorporated that old
> Brittish Encyclopaedic ventures text which has its
> copyright expired, now would we?
> This kind of content can not be considered barred
> from being added from wikipedia to knol, or can it?
> I at least don't understand how it could be. If the
> GFDL's viral nature is retroactive in a fashion that
> previously PD work is no longer usable in that
> manner, I must say I have understood something
> really really wrong.
> Now if one reads Mike Godwins text closely it does
> say "content produced under WMF's licensing options",
> which, I suppose, means text that didn't exist in a
> published form before being entered into wikimedia.
> That is a very interesting turn of phrase and bears
> some thinking about.
> Yours,
> Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

More information about the foundation-l mailing list