On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 9:37 AM, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 22 December 2015 at 12:27, Andreas Kolbe jayen466@gmail.com wrote:
It's surely not beyond human skill to devise a licence for Wikidata that requires re-users to include the three words above on their website,
while
placing no other duties or restrictions on them.
You appear to be suggesting a homebrew license
+1
Requiring that reusers credit the *web site* would be new in the Wikimedia world, and I don't see the advantage. Certainly, serious reusers who wish to establish credibility should be transparent about the source of their data; but it's not our proper role to compel them to do so.
Attribution requirements in CC licenses are about crediting the *copyright holders*.
Andreas, I realize this has been much discussed in this thread, but I don't think I've seen this angle addressed directly: In order for any copyright license to apply, somebody has to hold the copyright. Who do you imagine has a legitimate claim to copyright over the emergent database that grows as multiple individuals and automated processes add individual, non-copyrightable claims/statements/facts?
-Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]]