At 5:39 AM +0000 11/1/06, luke brandt wrote: >Peter Hitchmough wrote: > > I have restored the GFDL copyright and copyright logo into the wiki. It >> was a config issue. >> >> I am busy extending Wiki code to authoritatively track articles imported >> from WP. For all unedited articles and articles first imported from WP >> the templates will be automagically included. >> > > --Peter > >Sorry if I missed this, but has any policy been decided on whether we, >on our part, allow 'fair use' or are we to strictly adhere to the GFDL.
If we are copying content verbatim or almost verbatim from Wikipedia, then there is no point for discussion; its GFDL or the highway. The fact is that the GFDL is giving us extra rights to use Wikipedia content that we otherwise wouldn't have under plain copyright law, so we accept the GFDL or we don't copy the content, period. The only way we can use the Wikipedia content and not be subject to the GFDL is if we are only doing things with it that vanilla copyright law allows. For example, if we completely rewrite the articles, so that we present the information using our own words instead of theirs, then that is fine. As for "fair use", that involves maybe copying 1 or 2 sentences from an article, with attributions. Copy more actual Wikipedia text than such a minimum, and its only the GFDL that allows this, under its criteria. -- Darren Duncan _______________________________________________ Citizendium-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.purdue.edu/mailman/listinfo/citizendium-l
