date:20090115

 
In a message dated 1/15/2009 9:56:34 PM Pacific Standard Time,  
mor...@gmail.com writes:

You are  copying the formula.  There is no item itself to be  "stolen".>>


-
 
And no one is stopping anyone, from taking an old Bible and scanning  it.
But if you want to come to my bible.org website and copy off all my scans  of 
old bibles and then post them up on your website, that is quite a different  
thing.
 
The simple fact that an underlying object is PD does not give carte blanche  
to rehost someone else's photographs.
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

In a message dated 1/15/2009 9:46:00 PM Pacific Standard Time,  
geni...@gmail.com writes:

Okey so  you consider copying images different to copying formulas? The
endpoint of  your argument would be that if someone takes a PD image
and converts it  into SVG it is okey to copy it but if they put it in a
raster format it  isn't.>>
--
If you take a chemical formula and make your own drug out of it,  fine.
If you walk into a pharmacy and say "Give me your aspirin because the  
formula is in the public domain, the will laugh at you or call the  police."
 
Walking onto a website and saying, well since the *underlying object* that  
you are photographing is itself in the public domain, I think I'll just steal  
your image of it, is the same example as trying to take a drug where the 
formula  itself is public domain.
 
The drug thing is just a bad example.  It is not nearly close enough  to the 
issue.
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Jeremy Hanson

2009-01-15 Thread Ian Woollard

In my experience these kinds of problems need to be dealt with firmly,
with a minimum of collateral damage, but in a reactive way that tells
the vandal that they can't in general win, in no uncertain terms.

Messing around with proxy blocks and filters and stuff- it's much too
brittle, it's probably never going to work.

I think the easiest and most effective way to handle this GRAWP issue is just to
temporarily increase the account age requirement for page moves to (say) 6
months on the wikipedia, and make any account less recent than that go
through an admin.

If it puts him out of business he'll probably get bored and stop.

In a few weeks we could try reducing it again, and if he starts back
up, raise it again promptly.

The point is, there is no way around that; he can't win. Even if he
ages accounts we just raise the requirement, wait a while, and then
lower it again. Rinse, lather, repeat. The point is to give them the
idea that they're up against an implacable obstacle; which... they
are.

-- 
-Ian Woollard

We live in an imperfectly imperfect world. Life in a perfectly
imperfect world would be much better.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Journal of Biblical Literature is also requiring aWikipedia entry

2009-01-15 Thread Scientia Potentia est

Read the blogpost more carefully.

--- On Thu, 1/15/09, brewhaha%40edmc.net  wrote:
From: brewhaha%40edmc.net 
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Journal of Biblical Literature is also requiring 
aWikipedia entry
To: wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Thursday, January 15, 2009, 9:53 PM

I do not think the encyclopedia is the best way to promote literature of 
this kind. The web? Sure. Everybody on the internet has publishing capacity 
on the web. The encyclopedia is for facts that are really not open to 
dispute. wikisources or wikimedia commons seem like more appropriate venues 
if not a USENET newsgroup, like alt.religion.*

"David Gerard"  wrote in message 
news:fbad4e140901020504w67cf6cf9p76f59248b3cbe...@mail.gmail.com...
>
http://ancienthebrewpoetry.typepad.com/ancient_hebrew_poetry/2009/01/new-guidelines-for-jbl-contributors-publish-in-wikipedia-or-perish.html
>
> Similar journals are apparently likely to do the same.
>
> So. When will this become standard?
>
>
> - d.
>
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> 




___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l



  
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Journal of Biblical Literature is also requiring aWikipedia entry

I do not think the encyclopedia is the best way to promote literature of 
this kind. The web? Sure. Everybody on the internet has publishing capacity 
on the web. The encyclopedia is for facts that are really not open to 
dispute. wikisources or wikimedia commons seem like more appropriate venues 
if not a USENET newsgroup, like alt.religion.*

"David Gerard"  wrote in message 
news:fbad4e140901020504w67cf6cf9p76f59248b3cbe...@mail.gmail.com...
> http://ancienthebrewpoetry.typepad.com/ancient_hebrew_poetry/2009/01/new-guidelines-for-jbl-contributors-publish-in-wikipedia-or-perish.html
>
> Similar journals are apparently likely to do the same.
>
> So. When will this become standard?
>
>
> - d.
>
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> 




___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009-01-15 Thread Matthew Brown

On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 9:28 PM,   wrote:
> You are copying the formula.
> You are not stealing the item itself.
> There is quite a difference, sigh or no sigh.
>
> If you are so worn out by this argument, then stop arguing.
>
> In the case of images, you are not copying a formula, you are copying the
> item itself.

You are copying the formula.  There is no item itself to be "stolen".

-Matt

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009/1/16  :
> Wikipedia operates under US law.
> So you're admitting that you want to argue forever over it, but you're not
> willing to actually test it.

Strangely when dealing with the actions of a UK resident UK courts
wont care what law wikipedia thinks it operates under. This is basic
stuff.


-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[WikiEN-l] Hacker does not equal Cracker

> Hacker != Cracker!
> -Ian Woollard

In a group dedicated to publishing kludges and various manners of creativity 
with machines (unspecified moderator), that is true. In the popular press, 
of course, since a hacker is human and can be bribed or even supported and 
indoctrinated, crackers are hackers. Hackers are not necessarily crackers. 




___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009/1/16  :
> You are copying the formula.
> You are not stealing the item itself.
> There is quite a difference, sigh or no sigh.

Okey so you consider copying images different to copying formulas? The
endpoint of your argument would be that if someone takes a PD image
and converts it into SVG it is okey to copy it but if they put it in a
raster format it isn't.

Or perhaps you think chemicals are magically different. If the formula
is a DNA string I can literally drop it into a machine that will
pretty much print it out.

Still another option for people who make money of PD work are the
companies that take advantage of the 50 year rule on recorded music in
the UK.

-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009/1/16  :
> No one is stopping any American, from going to the repository where the
> originals items are stored and viewing them.  You know this, I don't know  
> why you
> keep pushing on that button, when it's clear that it's a non  starter.

View!= scanning.  Heh ever tried to have a conversation with a
government depositry about scanning their stuff?

> The companies are not trying to prevent people from viewing PD items.   They
> are trying to prevent the viewing of their own copies of those items.   Not
> the items.  The copies.

They are free to do that. Just can't use copyright as a tool.



-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

 
In a message dated 1/15/2009 9:27:34 PM Pacific Standard Time,  
geni...@gmail.com writes:

I've  mentioned rather a lot of times I'm British. British law in this
area is  slightly different.>>


--
 
Wikipedia operates under US law.
So you're admitting that you want to argue forever over it, but you're not  
willing to actually test it.
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

In a message dated 1/15/2009 9:27:34 PM Pacific Standard Time,  
geni...@gmail.com writes:

>  yes that's my point.
> You scanned it.
> You scanned it from  PD documents.
> So this example only repeats what I've been  saying.

Not really.>>

-

You yourself stated that you scanned these items.
"Not really" is a vague counter argument.

**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

 
In a message dated 1/15/2009 9:25:56 PM Pacific Standard Time,  
geni...@gmail.com writes:

Sigh.  Companies that make generic pharmaceutical are making a product
I am free  to take, analyse and copy (okey so in reality I'd just look
up the expired  patent). They cannot control exclussive access to the
stuff. And yet they  make money.>>


-
You are copying the formula.
You are not stealing the item itself.
There is quite a difference, sigh or no sigh.
 
If you are so worn out by this argument, then stop arguing.
 
In the case of images, you are not copying a formula, you are copying the  
item itself.
 
Next bad example ?
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

In a message dated 1/15/2009 9:21:46 PM Pacific Standard Time,  
geni...@gmail.com writes:

US law  however has for the time being decided that sweat of the brow
is not a  variable to be considered.

Since scanning is non creative there can be  no copyright under US law.
They may be under UK law depending on the  process and they are rather
unlikely to be under swiss law (which has  rather high barriers to
copyright).>>
-
 
Then put your money where your mouth is :)
Go copy a bunch of stuff off one of these cites and post it to  Commons.
If you're not willing to steal someone else's work, you should stop  
advocating other people test your theory.
 
 

 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009/1/16  :

> yes that's my point.
> You scanned it.
> You scanned it from PD documents.
> So this example only repeats what I've been saying.

Not really.

> What I want you to do, is go find some web site and copy their stuff, and
> then post it to Commons :)
> do that

I've mentioned rather a lot of times I'm British. British law in this
area is slightly different.

-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009/1/16  :
>
> In a message dated 1/15/2009 9:15:53 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> geni...@gmail.com writes:
>
>
> Just  about every company that makes Generic  pharmaceutics.>>
>
>
> -
>
> So you're advocating stealing from pharmacies to get free drugs?
> Otherwise I don't see the point in this example
> We're talking about *free* here after all

Sigh. Companies that make generic pharmaceutical are making a product
I am free to take, analyse and copy (okey so in reality I'd just look
up the expired patent). They cannot control exclussive access to the
stuff. And yet they make money.

-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] General versus specific names/scope for articles

In this matter of choice, I avoid jeneral terms when I can. For example, I 
rarely write "algae", because that could refer to moss that has a solid 
substrate or dissolved phytoplankton. The practical difference is that 
plankton can grow (and consume oxygen in decomposition) a lot faster than 
moss. Other writers figure that they want to, and can safely get rid of, 
both, so they lump it altogether in "algae", a word that I avoid.

Is no combusion external to an enjin? Or, external combusion is incidental 
to light enjinz like rockets and afterburning turbines. Does having the fire 
enclosed in solids for the vast majority of the burn make it internal 
combustion? I think that is a popular understanding that excludes rockets 
and turbines. 




___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009/1/16  :
> In a message dated 1/15/2009 7:53:56 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> geni...@gmail.com writes:
>
> Which  effectively kicks out sweat of the brow. Sweat of the brow is on
> it's own  non creative.>>
>
> False.  Sweat of the brow discusses effort.
> Creativity and effort can both exist, or neither exist, or one.
> They are independent variables.

US law however has for the time being decided that sweat of the brow
is not a variable to be considered.

Since scanning is non creative there can be no copyright under US law.
They may be under UK law depending on the process and they are rather
unlikely to be under swiss law (which has rather high barriers to
copyright).

-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

 
In a message dated 1/15/2009 9:15:53 PM Pacific Standard Time,  
geni...@gmail.com writes:


Just  about every company that makes Generic  pharmaceutics.>>


-
 
So you're advocating stealing from pharmacies to get free drugs?
Otherwise I don't see the point in this example
We're talking about *free* here after all
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

 
In a message dated 1/15/2009 9:12:15 PM Pacific Standard Time,  
geni...@gmail.com writes:

Again  depends where they are. But yes any American can do that with
this stuff  most of which I scanned:>>



--
yes that's my point.
You scanned it.
You scanned it from PD documents.
So this example only repeats what I've been saying.
 
What I want you to do, is go find some web site and copy their stuff, and  
then post it to Commons :)
do that
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009/1/16  :
>
> In a message dated 1/15/2009 9:06:06 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> mor...@gmail.com writes:
>
> Plenty  of companies make money from things that they cannot control
> exclusive  access to.  If they provide a service worth money, they will
> remain  profitable.>>
>
>
> Name one

Just about every company that makes Generic pharmaceutics.



-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009/1/16  :
> Not a good example.
> The building owner is not working your camera, you are.
> You own the photographs you take, not the person who owns the object being
> photographed.

Your US bias is showing. Consider French law.

Still if you want a US law based case. Substitute 3D artworks in a
public place in the UK for building.

>
> But what you are advocating, is that if you take lots of photos, and post
> them to your own web site, that any person wandering by who says "Oh that's an
> image of a piece of art in the public domain" can just lift it off your site,
> and plop it on theirs.
>
> Without any credit to you, without any consideration.

Again depends where they are. But yes any American can do that with
this stuff most of which I scanned:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Old_Ordnance_Survey_map_images


-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

In a message dated 1/15/2009 9:08:08 PM Pacific Standard Time,  
geni...@gmail.com writes:

Ah no. I  want Americans to exercise the legal ability they have to use
certain  material in certain ways. If that cases companies issues then
under the  principles of capitalism that isn't my problem unless I own
shares in  them.

>That's not very nice.
1)Copyright law isn't  nice
2)Compared to most of the other bits the relevant area isn't very  nasty.>>
---
 
No one is stopping any American, from going to the repository where the  
originals items are stored and viewing them.  You know this, I don't know  why 
you 
keep pushing on that button, when it's clear that it's a non  starter.
 
The companies are not trying to prevent people from viewing PD items.   They 
are trying to prevent the viewing of their own copies of those items.   Not 
the items.  The copies.
 
You want readers of this thread to think that the only issue here is  
copyright law, but it's not.  Never was.  That's just a handy crutch  for 
people who 
are intent on theft to justify their actions.
 
 

 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

You're right.


--
Alvaro

On 16-01-2009, at 2:04, "Thomas Dalton"  wrote:

> 2009/1/16 Alvaro García :
>> That's right, because there are still people that are reluctant to
>> believe what Wikipedia says.
>
> We're talking about widespread support, not universal support.
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

Well, nevermind. We are getting nowhere here.


--
Alvaro

On 16-01-2009, at 1:53, "Al Tally"  wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 4:43 AM, Alvaro García  w 
> rote:
>
>> That's right, because there are still people that are reluctant to
>> believe what Wikipedia says.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Alvaro
>>
>
> That doesn't mean it lacks widespread support.
>
> -- 
> Alex
> (User:Majorly)
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

 
In a message dated 1/15/2009 9:06:06 PM Pacific Standard Time,  
mor...@gmail.com writes:

Plenty  of companies make money from things that they cannot control
exclusive  access to.  If they provide a service worth money, they will
remain  profitable.>>


Name one
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009/1/16  :
> We have always had the problem of how to access pd documents that might be
> sitting in some repository like for example the US Federal Census.
>
> Until ancestry and genealogy, starting scanning them in, you had to *go* to
> a Federal Archives (or similar repository) and sit *there* and view them
> during  their hours and under their control.
>
> Now that net sites have begun uploading those documents so we can  conviently
> view them, you want to steal them.

Ah no. I want Americans to exercise the legal ability they have to use
certain material in certain ways. If that cases companies issues then
under the principles of capitalism that isn't my problem unless I own
shares in them.

>That's not very nice.
1)Copyright law isn't nice
2)Compared to most of the other bits the relevant area isn't very nasty.


-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

2009-01-15 Thread Scientia Potentia est

Sometimes even widespread support is too much to ask.

bibliomaniac15

--- On Thu, 1/15/09, Thomas Dalton  wrote:
From: Thomas Dalton 
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia
To: "English Wikipedia" 
Date: Thursday, January 15, 2009, 9:04 PM

2009/1/16 Alvaro García :
> That's right, because there are still people that are reluctant to
> believe what Wikipedia says.

We're talking about widespread support, not universal support.
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009-01-15 Thread Matthew Brown

On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 9:00 PM,   wrote:
> They are not creating air.
> Please use an example that makes more sense.
> These companies are in the business of providing these images.
> Without this business, they cease to exist, and the images cease.

These companies knew the state of the law when they started doing that business.

Plenty of companies make money from things that they cannot control
exclusive access to.  If they provide a service worth money, they will
remain profitable.

-Matt

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

2009/1/16 Alvaro García :
> That's right, because there are still people that are reluctant to
> believe what Wikipedia says.

We're talking about widespread support, not universal support.
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

 
In a message dated 1/15/2009 9:02:02 PM Pacific Standard Time,  
geni...@gmail.com writes:

Well  yes. Just as I will ignore claims of copyright by the building
owner over  photos I take of buildings in the UK.>>



 
Not a good example.
The building owner is not working your camera, you are.
You own the photographs you take, not the person who owns the object being  
photographed.
 
But what you are advocating, is that if you take lots of photos, and post  
them to your own web site, that any person wandering by who says "Oh that's an  
image of a piece of art in the public domain" can just lift it off your site,  
and plop it on theirs.
 
Without any credit to you, without any consideration.
 
That's quite different from taking a picture of a building.
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009/1/16  :
> But that's the way it's *always* been.

So what>

> What you want, is for me or some library or google or whoever, to do all  the
> heavy lifting work, by scanning thousands or hundreds of thousands of pages
> of material, and then to just... steal it.

Not at all. Everyone has a choice. In any case you are wasting your
time if you think page counts are going to impress me. I know the
basics of modern scanning techniques.


> That is essentially what you are saying.
> Once you've done all the work, tough, go spin, we'll do whatever we want
> with your work.

Well yes. Just as I will ignore claims of copyright by the building
owner over photos I take of buildings in the UK.

> That isn't what the court case you keep citing says you can do.
> Not at all.

No. It doesn't say I can do that. However it makes it pretty clear
that US based wikipedians can. Given the number of copyright claims
we've ignored citing that case you would have thought someone would
have tired taking the situation to court if they thought they actually
had a case.

-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

 
In a message dated 1/15/2009 8:55:58 PM Pacific Standard Time,  
mor...@gmail.com writes:

is  recorded is property, yes, but nobody is being deprived  of
property.

It is not theft any more than breathing the air within  their building
would be theft.

-Matt



 
They are not creating air.
Please use an example that makes more sense.
These companies are in the business of providing these images.
Without this business, they cease to exist, and the images cease.
 
So who wins that ?
Nobody wins.  We all lose.
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Jeremy Hanson

2009-01-15 Thread Nathan

With all due respect, you appear to have no idea what you're talking about.

Nathan

On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 11:47 PM, brewhaha%40edmc.net wrote:

> Do we not yet hav a policy regarding open proxies (relays)? I would think
> that anonymizer.com and anything like it is blocked indefinitely. hotmail
> and gmail blocked anonymizer.com. Why should we not? As a jeneral rule,
> open
> relays for e-mail are listed and blocked, so as a jeneral rule, mail relays
> only serve congestion physics and paying users.
> ___
> No one can abuse you without your permission.
> --Ann Landers
>
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Jeremy Hanson

2009-01-15 Thread Al Tally

On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 4:47 AM, brewhaha%40edmc.net wrote:

> Do we not yet hav a policy regarding open proxies (relays)? I would think
> that anonymizer.com and anything like it is blocked indefinitely. hotmail
> and gmail blocked anonymizer.com. Why should we not? As a jeneral rule,
> open
> relays for e-mail are listed and blocked, so as a jeneral rule, mail relays
> only serve congestion physics and paying users.
>

Yes, we do have a rule. We also have a rule against vandalism. Hanson does
not care for rules. Anonymizer.com is just one proxy. There are thousands of
proxies. He also edits through a normal ISP. We can't range block that; it
would be impractical.

-- 
Alex
(User:Majorly)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009-01-15 Thread Matthew Brown

On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 8:23 PM,   wrote:
> Now that net sites have begun uploading those documents so we can  conviently
> view them, you want to steal them.  That's not very nice.

They cannot be stolen.  The information is being copied, not
destroyed, and the information is not property; the material on which
it is recorded is property, yes, but nobody is being deprived of
property.

It is not theft any more than breathing the air within their building
would be theft.

-Matt

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

2009-01-15 Thread Al Tally

On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 4:43 AM, Alvaro García  wrote:

> That's right, because there are still people that are reluctant to
> believe what Wikipedia says.
>
>
> --
> Alvaro
>

That doesn't mean it lacks widespread support.

-- 
Alex
(User:Majorly)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Jeremy Hanson

Do we not yet hav a policy regarding open proxies (relays)? I would think 
that anonymizer.com and anything like it is blocked indefinitely. hotmail 
and gmail blocked anonymizer.com. Why should we not? As a jeneral rule, open 
relays for e-mail are listed and blocked, so as a jeneral rule, mail relays 
only serve congestion physics and paying users.
___
No one can abuse you without your permission.
--Ann Landers

"Christopher Grant"  wrote in message 
news:725b770d0901151828j6c7d87ffkb90d5a52288d8...@mail.gmail.com...
> He uses proxies, rangeblocks won't help.
> - Chris
>
> On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 11:25 AM,  wrote:
>
>> Range blocks are ridiculous overkill.
>>
>> Hey let's black out Illinois just for the fun of it!  See if anyone
>> complains!
>>
>>
>> **A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 
>> easy
>> steps!
>> (
>> http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
>> cemailfooterNO62
>> )
>> ___
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> 




___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

That's right, because there are still people that are reluctant to  
believe what Wikipedia says.


--
Alvaro

On 16-01-2009, at 1:40, "Thomas Dalton"  wrote:

> 2009/1/16 Alvaro García :
>> I didn't meant it isn't used. Don't be sarcastic. If I'm on here is
>> because I love Wikipedia. No one can disagree with the fact that it's
>> used. Please read my message.
>
> Your message said there was no widespread support for Wikipedia.
> That's crazy talk, pure and simple.
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

2009/1/16 Alvaro García :
> I didn't meant it isn't used. Don't be sarcastic. If I'm on here is
> because I love Wikipedia. No one can disagree with the fact that it's
> used. Please read my message.

Your message said there was no widespread support for Wikipedia.
That's crazy talk, pure and simple.
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia


On Jan 15, 2009, at 9:51 PM, geni wrote:

> 2009/1/16 Philip Sandifer :
>> Your choice of CC-BY-SA, which, at least for now, closes off use of
>> Wikipedia content (and visa versa). It seems silly to start a free
>> content encyclopedia and then render yourself unable to share content
>> with a rather large project already underway in that area.
>>
>> -Phil
>
> Given the phrasing of the relicensing section of the GFDL 1.3 using it
> on a new project would be a really bad idea. At this point if you copy
> work from wikipedia then people modify it you cannot use the
> relicensing section to shift the modified versions over to
> CC-BY-SA-3.0.

It seems like, at the moment, a dual-license would be the most  
sensible route for a new project.

-Phil

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

I didn't meant it isn't used. Don't be sarcastic. If I'm on here is  
because I love Wikipedia. No one can disagree with the fact that it's  
used. Please read my message.


--
Alvaro

On 16-01-2009, at 1:11, KillerChihuahua   
wrote:

> Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> 2009/1/16 Alvaro García :
>>
>>> There is no widespread support. There are some people to which you  
>>> can
>>> say something they don't agree with and back the argument up by  
>>> saying
>>> it's on Wikipedia, and they will say "Anyone can edit Wikipedia".
>>>
>>
>> Have you looked at the donation statistics? And the page view
>> statistics? Plenty of people complain about Wikipedia, but far more
>> people use it and support it on a regular basis.
>>
> I have to agree with Thomas. Its the #4 site. Not the #4 information
> site. #4, overall. I'm guessing that people are using it; call me  
> crazy
> but I think a few people are actually looking things up here.
>
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

We have always had the problem of how to access pd documents that might be  
sitting in some repository like for example the US Federal Census.
 
Until ancestry and genealogy, starting scanning them in, you had to *go* to  
a Federal Archives (or similar repository) and sit *there* and view them 
during  their hours and under their control.
 
Now that net sites have begun uploading those documents so we can  conviently 
view them, you want to steal them.  That's not very nice.
 
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

But that's the way it's *always* been.
 
What you want, is for me or some library or google or whoever, to do all  the 
heavy lifting work, by scanning thousands or hundreds of thousands of pages  
of material, and then to just... steal it.
 
That is essentially what you are saying.
Once you've done all the work, tough, go spin, we'll do whatever we want  
with your work.
 
That isn't what the court case you keep citing says you can do.
Not at all.
 
Will
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009/1/16  :
> That doesn't make sense to me.
> How do you limit PD items?
> How can I, direct the land office in my local county to *stop* giving  copies
> to people who walk in?
> I can't.

You seem to assume that all PD items are in public collections.

> If something is PD, then there is *some* where you can go or write or call
> to get a copy.
>
>
> You are confusing the *creation* of an image, with the *creation* of the
> original document.
>
> What we're discussing here is limiting the use of your creation, not the
> original creation.
>
> Unless you're actually proposing that PD-item scanners are actually buying
> originals and then destroying all copies of them in the world except their
> own.  I really doubt that is occuring.
>
> Will

Doesn't need to happen. In many cases there are only a very small
number of copies or even just one. Most collectors are not going to
allow people nears there stuff with scanners unless they are paid for
access.

But even public collections have this problem. I doubt you would be
able to get a scanner into the imperial war museum collection or the
British library collection. Under your system the only way to get a
copy of those things not protected by rather limiting conditions. For
example he's the conditions for the imperial war museam:

http://collections.iwm.org.uk/upload/pdf/newlegal02a.pdf


-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

2009/1/16 Alvaro García :
> I know many people use it, but still many people don't think it's
> reliable.
> You don't have to show me any statistics. I know Wikipedia is used by
> many people, but still many people (specially old) don't like it.

Nobody said it was universally supported. It is, quite obviously,
widely supported, though. I can't believe anyone would dispute that,
it's crazy.
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

2009-01-15 Thread KillerChihuahua

Thomas Dalton wrote:
> 2009/1/16 Alvaro García :
>   
>> There is no widespread support. There are some people to which you can
>> say something they don't agree with and back the argument up by saying
>> it's on Wikipedia, and they will say "Anyone can edit Wikipedia".
>> 
>
> Have you looked at the donation statistics? And the page view
> statistics? Plenty of people complain about Wikipedia, but far more
> people use it and support it on a regular basis.
>   
I have to agree with Thomas. Its the #4 site. Not the #4 information 
site. #4, overall. I'm guessing that people are using it; call me crazy 
but I think a few people are actually looking things up here.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

I know many people use it, but still many people don't think it's  
reliable.
You don't have to show me any statistics. I know Wikipedia is used by  
many people, but still many people (specially old) don't like it.


--
Alvaro

On 16-01-2009, at 0:58, "Thomas Dalton"  wrote:

> 2009/1/16 Alvaro García :
>> There is no widespread support. There are some people to which you  
>> can
>> say something they don't agree with and back the argument up by  
>> saying
>> it's on Wikipedia, and they will say "Anyone can edit Wikipedia".
>
> Have you looked at the donation statistics? And the page view
> statistics? Plenty of people complain about Wikipedia, but far more
> people use it and support it on a regular basis.
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

2009/1/16 Alvaro García :
> There is no widespread support. There are some people to which you can
> say something they don't agree with and back the argument up by saying
> it's on Wikipedia, and they will say "Anyone can edit Wikipedia".

Have you looked at the donation statistics? And the page view
statistics? Plenty of people complain about Wikipedia, but far more
people use it and support it on a regular basis.
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

In a message dated 1/15/2009 7:53:56 PM Pacific Standard Time,  
geni...@gmail.com writes:

Which  effectively kicks out sweat of the brow. Sweat of the brow is on
it's own  non creative.>>
 
False.  Sweat of the brow discusses effort.
Creativity and effort can both exist, or neither exist, or one.
They are independent variables.
 
 

 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

In a message dated 1/15/2009 7:52:46 PM Pacific Standard Time,
geni...@gmail.com writes:

Against that you have to consider that granting copyright in such
cases effectively allows someone who can limit the physical access to
the document to enjoy all the benefits of copyright even though they
didn't create it.

Sometimes the access control doesn't mean much. New popular edition
maps are cheap. So acquiring them to scan does not present a major
problem. Older less mass produced maps? 10K+. In effect you prevent
large parts of the public domain ever being meaningfully PD.>>

That doesn't make sense to me.
How do you limit PD items?
How can I, direct the land office in my local county to *stop* giving copies
to people who walk in?
I can't.

If something is PD, then there is *some* where you can go or write or call
to get a copy.

You are confusing the *creation* of an image, with the *creation* of the
original document.

What we're discussing here is limiting the use of your creation, not the
original creation.

Unless you're actually proposing that PD-item scanners are actually buying
originals and then destroying all copies of them in the world except their
own. I really doubt that is occuring.

Will

**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
steps!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

There is no widespread support. There are some people to which you can  
say something they don't agree with and back the argument up by saying  
it's on Wikipedia, and they will say "Anyone can edit Wikipedia".


--
Alvaro

On 15-01-2009, at 22:18, "Thomas Dalton"   
wrote:

> Two questions:
>
> 1) What are you plans regarding incorporating content from other
> projects? There is a good chance that Wikipedia will soon switch to a
> license compatible with yours, so you could copy content across. Do
> you plan to do so, and to what extent?
>
> 2) Your "About" page says:
>
> "Other projects have attempted, and continue to attempt, to develop
> free Internet encyclopedias—Wikipedia, Citizendium, Conservapedia,
> Open-Site, Scholarpedia, Veropedia, and Wikinfo, to name a few—yet
> have failed to produce reliable content, to attract a broad, diverse,
> responsible, and democratic community, or to achieve widespread public
> support."
>
> I dispute that. Studies have shown that Wikipedia is as reliable as
> conventional encyclopaedias, the wide range of subjects covered in
> great depths shows we have a broad and diverse community, I haven't
> seen anything to suggest the Wikipedia community is irresponsible, and
> we don't try to be democratic so you're making a massive assumption
> there that democracy is the best way to run such a project. As for
> widespread public support, millions of dollars of donations over the
> past couple of months suggests we don't have a problem there. So which
> of those aspects are you suggesting Wikipedia has failed in?
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009/1/16  :
> The ruling did *not* repeal sweat-of-the-brow.  What it did was state  that
> your work must have some creativity, some originality, some non-obvious
> content in order to enjoy copyright protection.

Which effectively kicks out sweat of the brow. Sweat of the brow is on
it's own non creative.


-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009/1/16  :
> You know perfectly well this is a "theory" of the law and the case law is
> not clear.

Depends where you are.

>
> And I hope you realize the chilling effect it gives to state that something
> like Google Books has no protection for their out-of-copyright scans.  That
> Microsoft or whoever, can simply copy all of that material onto their own
> servers and thumb their noses at Google.

Sure. Would take them forever though.

> That is what you're saying.
> That theory would effectively end anyone attempting to upload PD anything  of
> significant value.

Not really. Just because you have the content doesn't mean you are equal.

> Sure people will upload little dribs and drabs but we'll not be getting
> thousands of pages of census, and hundreds of thousands of pages of documents,
> maps, etc, since anyone like yourself can just copy the entire contents, 
> rehost
> them, and place your own ads on your own server and make money off doing
> virtually nothing.
>
> This is what you want  to happen on the internet?
> This sounds like a good thing to you?


Your problem is that you are forgetting a number of factors. First
there is the issue of first mover advantage. People get used to google
books before Microsoft has a chance to compete. Second there is the
issue of presentation. Microsoft can do all the mirroring they like
won't mean they can match Google's software. Lots of was to add value
with software.

Frequently the design of the software can make large scale harvesting
a near impossibility. Throw in some watermarking and mirroring your
stuff seems rather unattractive. Sure wikipedia might be prepared to
remove the watermark (sometimes for example only one image on
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Sydney_Harbour has had the AWM
watermark removed) but most people won't and those that do won't be
able to on a large scale.

You mention census stuff but that is mostly a government thing.

Against that you have to consider that granting copyright in such
cases effectively allows someone who can limit the physical access to
the document to enjoy all the benefits of copyright even though they
didn't create it.

Sometimes the access control doesn't mean much. New popular edition
maps are cheap. So acquiring them to scan does not present a major
problem. Older less mass produced maps? 10K+. In effect you prevent
large parts of the public domain ever being meaningfully PD.

-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

In a message dated 1/15/2009 7:10:42 PM Pacific Standard Time,  
thomas.dal...@gmail.com writes:

>  Wikipedia's main issues, in my eyes, are (a) lack of _consistent_
>  reliability (compare articles in the hard sciences, which tend to be
>  written by specialists, to articles in the soft sciences such as the
>  humanities)

What is that assertion based on? That studies I've seen  have examined
quite a broad range of  articles.>>>
--

See
_http://www.google.com/search?q=study+brittanica+wikipedia_ 
(http://www.google.com/search?q=study+brittanica+wikipedia) 

**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

 
In a message dated 1/15/2009 7:31:45 PM Pacific Standard Time,  
larsen.thoma...@gmail.com writes:

What  studies? I'm aware that Britannica did a study, but it was my
understanding  that they focused mainly on topics in the hard sciences.
There may have  been studies done that I was unaware of, though.


---
 
Brittanica financed a study?
I was under the impression the study was done independently *comparing* us  
to Brittanica.
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

Hi Thomas,

> You had better read the new GFDL license again - only Wikimedia can
> relicence content on Wikimedia projects (that was the purpose of the
> deadline that passed 2 days before the license was published). You'll
> have to wait. My question was what you plan to do if Wikipedia does
> switch.

I read the license again, and determined that "The operator of an MMC
Site may republish an MMC contained in the site under CC-BY-SA on the
same site at any time before August 1, 2009, provided the MMC is
eligible for relicensing."

That raises a number of concerns, actually, since there are a number
of Wikipedia-adapted articles on Epistemia. I'll have to delete them,
and restore them when Wikimedia relicenses.

> What is that assertion based on? That studies I've seen have examined
> quite a broad range of articles.

What studies? I'm aware that Britannica did a study, but it was my
understanding that they focused mainly on topics in the hard sciences.
There may have been studies done that I was unaware of, though.

On the other hand, a few glances at the many of the articles returned
by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random shows that Wikipedia
still needs much work, especially on topics which aren't particular
popular.

> Sure, but civility wasn't on your list.

I guess I, confusingly, grouped it under "not responsible" :-).

—Thomas Larsen

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

The sweat-of-the-brow case
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_Publications_v._Rural_Telephone_Service_ 
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_Publications_v._Rural_Telephone_Service) 
 
is actually a rather specific and technical exception to the general rule  of 
"minimal spark of creativity".
 
This was a telephone book, which one company took, and *did not copy* the  
pages, they copied the *content* of those pages, and then inserted that content 
 
into a broader database of similar content i.e. the listings for all of 
Kansas,  instead of just the one town.
 
The ruling, writen I think by O'Connor was fairly narrow and not as extreme  
as some are implying.
 
The ruling did *not* repeal sweat-of-the-brow.  What it did was state  that 
your work must have some creativity, some originality, some non-obvious  
content in order to enjoy copyright protection.
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

2009/1/16 Thomas Larsen :
> Hi Thomas,
>
>> 1) What are you plans regarding incorporating content from other
>> projects? There is a good chance that Wikipedia will soon switch to a
>> license compatible with yours, so you could copy content across. Do
>> you plan to do so, and to what extent?
>
> My knowledge of the licence situation at the moment is that, since
> Wikipedia contributors agree to licence their contributions under
> "GFDL 1.2 _or later_", we can use them under GFDL 1.3 and thus import
> them to Epistemia under the CC-BY-SA. If, actually, we can't do this,
> then we'll just have to wait until Wikipedia changes to CC-BY-SA. I'm
> not willing, though, to make Wikipedia's mistake again (well,
> actually, calling it a "mistake" is not entirely fair, since it was
> the only real option back in 2001).

You had better read the new GFDL license again - only Wikimedia can
relicence content on Wikimedia projects (that was the purpose of the
deadline that passed 2 days before the license was published). You'll
have to wait. My question was what you plan to do if Wikipedia does
switch.

> Wikipedia's main issues, in my eyes, are (a) lack of _consistent_
> reliability (compare articles in the hard sciences, which tend to be
> written by specialists, to articles in the soft sciences such as the
> humanities)

What is that assertion based on? That studies I've seen have examined
quite a broad range of articles.

> and (b) a participatory culture that is commonly incivil
> and/or impolite. I'm sure you've experienced discussions where a
> perfectly good argument has been dissolved (or quelled) by hordes of
> angry, shouting people who are so passionate about a particular point
> of view, or too lazy to research it, that they refuse to accept logic.

Sure, but civility wasn't on your list.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

Hi Nathan,

> What is your plan for spreading the word about this project, out of
> curiosity? At least part of the problem encountered by the other
> Wikipedia-like projects is publicity - not enough people are aware of the
> effort to make it successful *and *people prefer to contribute to a project
> where there is a good likelihood that their work will be read and
> appreciated. I wonder how you, unlike the other efforts, will overcome this
> obstacle?

I'm mainly relying on word of mouth. Word travels fast over the
Internet, and I am convinced that quite a few people think that a
project in Wikipedia's vein, that addresses perceived problems without
doing something too drastic like requiring account approval, will be
interested and willing to check the project out.

That said, I'm very open to other suggestions.

Cheers!

—Thomas Larsen

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

Hi Thomas,

> 1) What are you plans regarding incorporating content from other
> projects? There is a good chance that Wikipedia will soon switch to a
> license compatible with yours, so you could copy content across. Do
> you plan to do so, and to what extent?

My knowledge of the licence situation at the moment is that, since
Wikipedia contributors agree to licence their contributions under
"GFDL 1.2 _or later_", we can use them under GFDL 1.3 and thus import
them to Epistemia under the CC-BY-SA. If, actually, we can't do this,
then we'll just have to wait until Wikipedia changes to CC-BY-SA. I'm
not willing, though, to make Wikipedia's mistake again (well,
actually, calling it a "mistake" is not entirely fair, since it was
the only real option back in 2001).

> 2) Your "About" page says:
>
> "Other projects have attempted, and continue to attempt, to develop
> free Internet encyclopedias—Wikipedia, Citizendium, Conservapedia,
> Open-Site, Scholarpedia, Veropedia, and Wikinfo, to name a few—yet
> have failed to produce reliable content, to attract a broad, diverse,
> responsible, and democratic community, or to achieve widespread public
> support."
>
> I dispute that. Studies have shown that Wikipedia is as reliable as
> conventional encyclopaedias, the wide range of subjects covered in
> great depths shows we have a broad and diverse community, I haven't
> seen anything to suggest the Wikipedia community is irresponsible, and
> we don't try to be democratic so you're making a massive assumption
> there that democracy is the best way to run such a project. As for
> widespread public support, millions of dollars of donations over the
> past couple of months suggests we don't have a problem there. So which
> of those aspects are you suggesting Wikipedia has failed in?

Wikipedia's main issues, in my eyes, are (a) lack of _consistent_
reliability (compare articles in the hard sciences, which tend to be
written by specialists, to articles in the soft sciences such as the
humanities) and (b) a participatory culture that is commonly incivil
and/or impolite. I'm sure you've experienced discussions where a
perfectly good argument has been dissolved (or quelled) by hordes of
angry, shouting people who are so passionate about a particular point
of view, or too lazy to research it, that they refuse to accept logic.

I think writing a kind of FAQ, or "differences between Epistemia and
other projects", page would be helpful, and I'll start writing one.

Cheers,

—Thomas Larsen

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

In a message dated 1/15/2009 6:46:41 PM Pacific Standard Time,
geni...@gmail.com writes:

Since under US
law sweat of the brow does not give something copyright protection if
your scans are publicly available it is rather hard to get people to
pay anything for them.>>

---
You know perfectly well this is a "theory" of the law and the case law is
not clear.

And I hope you realize the chilling effect it gives to state that something
like Google Books has no protection for their out-of-copyright scans. That
Microsoft or whoever, can simply copy all of that material onto their own
servers and thumb their noses at Google.

That is what you're saying.
That theory would effectively end anyone attempting to upload PD anything of
significant value.

Sure people will upload little dribs and drabs but we'll not be getting
thousands of pages of census, and hundreds of thousands of pages of documents,
maps, etc, since anyone like yourself can just copy the entire contents, rehost

them, and place your own ads on your own server and make money off doing
virtually nothing.

This is what you want to happen on the internet?
This sounds like a good thing to you?

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

2009/1/16 Philip Sandifer :
> Your choice of CC-BY-SA, which, at least for now, closes off use of
> Wikipedia content (and visa versa). It seems silly to start a free
> content encyclopedia and then render yourself unable to share content
> with a rather large project already underway in that area.
>
> -Phil

Given the phrasing of the relicensing section of the GFDL 1.3 using it
on a new project would be a really bad idea. At this point if you copy
work from wikipedia then people modify it you cannot use the
relicensing section to shift the modified versions over to
CC-BY-SA-3.0.



-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009/1/16  :
> It takes me a few dozen hours to scan the pages of a public domain  work.  I
> have a perfect right to expect payment for someone else to use  it.  That
> capitalism.

No. Under capitalism you have the right to expect what someone else is
prepared to pay you. If that is zero then it is zero. Since under US
law sweat of the brow does not give something copyright protection if
your scans are publicly available it is rather hard to get people to
pay anything for them.

-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

2009/1/16 Philip Sandifer :
>
> On Jan 15, 2009, at 8:01 PM, Thomas Larsen wrote:
>
>> Hi Phil,
>>
>>> And as a second question, license incompatibility? Really?
>>
>> What license incompatibility?
>
> Your choice of CC-BY-SA, which, at least for now, closes off use of
> Wikipedia content (and visa versa). It seems silly to start a free
> content encyclopedia and then render yourself unable to share content
> with a rather large project already underway in that area.

What would you recommend? GFDL? There a reason we're talking about
moving away for GFDL...

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Jeremy Hanson

Range blocks are ridiculous overkill.
 
Hey let's black out Illinois just for the fun of it!  See if anyone  
complains!
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Jeremy Hanson

2009-01-15 Thread Christopher Grant

He uses proxies, rangeblocks won't help.
- Chris

On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 11:25 AM,  wrote:

> Range blocks are ridiculous overkill.
>
> Hey let's black out Illinois just for the fun of it!  See if anyone
> complains!
>
>
> **A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
> steps!
> (
> http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
> cemailfooterNO62
> )
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Jeremy Hanson

2009-01-15 Thread Al Tally

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 6:40 AM, brewhaha%40edmc.net wrote:

>
> a.. 2007-09-05T20:26:03 (hist) (diff) m Talk:Muhammad ? (moved
> Talk:Muhammad
> to Talk:Muhammad raped little children, and he was a known prostitute, aka
> male whore. He worshiped Satan and sacrificed babies in his name.)
>
> Okay...This is about the worst I hav found, and it does not go under the
> heading of common assault. So, where is this stuff where Jeremy Hanson
> makes
> threats about doing things like this? Overall, he seems like a bot that
> likes moving things to "HAGGER". Under verizon's acceptable use policy,
> if they were enforcing it, yes, he could find himself and his mother
> disjoined from the internet. Under the law though, it is not common
> assault,
> so that hoped-for visit from feds is not likely. Hate-crimes? I did not
> look
> there, yet. They are not big in the western world. Remember the cartoons
> published? So, in total, I think range blocks are the best way to go.
> People
> with IDs will still be able to edit from verizon, and in fact people can
> obtain IDs via-e-mail, so I think "collateral damage" is a strong term for
> unintentional and temporary blocks. This will let the clerks nail down all
> of Grawp's accounts before he creates new ones. In a world of rampant
> excellence, verizon's users will ask verizon why, and verizon will ask
> someone at wikipedia in turn. Where is the common assault?
>

You clearly haven't looked very far then. He's made hundreds of attacks on
editors in page moves and username creations. I won't say what they are, but
I assure you, they are nasty.

-- 
Alex
(User:Majorly)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[WikiEN-l] Jeremy Hanson


a.. 2007-09-05T20:26:03 (hist) (diff) m Talk:Muhammad ? (moved Talk:Muhammad 
to Talk:Muhammad raped little children, and he was a known prostitute, aka 
male whore. He worshiped Satan and sacrificed babies in his name.)

Okay...This is about the worst I hav found, and it does not go under the 
heading of common assault. So, where is this stuff where Jeremy Hanson makes 
threats about doing things like this? Overall, he seems like a bot that 
likes moving things to "HAGGER". Under verizon's acceptable use policy, 
if they were enforcing it, yes, he could find himself and his mother 
disjoined from the internet. Under the law though, it is not common assault, 
so that hoped-for visit from feds is not likely. Hate-crimes? I did not look 
there, yet. They are not big in the western world. Remember the cartoons 
published? So, in total, I think range blocks are the best way to go. People 
with IDs will still be able to edit from verizon, and in fact people can 
obtain IDs via-e-mail, so I think "collateral damage" is a strong term for 
unintentional and temporary blocks. This will let the clerks nail down all 
of Grawp's accounts before he creates new ones. In a world of rampant 
excellence, verizon's users will ask verizon why, and verizon will ask 
someone at wikipedia in turn. Where is the common assault?
___
Nobody can abuse you without your permission.
--Ann Landers

"Comet styles"  wrote in message 
news:c7c66430812141923r3605e9a3s175d1dcb3418...@mail.gmail.com...
> Grawp has been a problem for a very long time and not only on the
> english wikipedia but on every single wikimedia wiki as well as about
> 200 other wikis and wikia and even though most of his edits were just
> page moves with links to shocksites, but quite recently within the
> last 6 month, he has started to randomly attack users both on their
> sex and religion and quite recently he has stoop so low as to attack
> the users family members and children which is most definitely the
> nail to the coffin. This has gone far enough and since the mother does
> not want to take matters to her own hands, we may have to take this
> one step further and go to the feds because internet bullying and
> harassment is a CRIME and its about time he paid the price..we have
> had enough !!
>
> -- 
> Cometstyles
>
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> 




___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

On Jan 15, 2009, at 8:01 PM, Thomas Larsen wrote:

> Hi Phil,
>
>> And as a second question, license incompatibility? Really?
>
> What license incompatibility?

Your choice of CC-BY-SA, which, at least for now, closes off use of  
Wikipedia content (and visa versa). It seems silly to start a free  
content encyclopedia and then render yourself unable to share content  
with a rather large project already underway in that area.

-Phil

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

 
In a message dated 1/15/2009 5:56:16 PM Pacific Standard Time,  
tracy.p...@gmail.com writes:

My  inexpert opinion is that convincing someone that they are required
to pay  you to use the material bearing the false copyright notice
would be  fraudulent intent, though I could be  wrong.>>



--
 
Thank you for the text of that.
Don't you think it's a bit odd to claim, that someone can steal the work of  
someone else for no payment whatsoever ?  Copyright or no?
 
If I work, and place a claim of copyright on my work, and you just take it,  
I really doubt that a *credible* excuse for theft is "he was claiming 
copyright  without a real copyright".
 
It's still theft of the work of someone else's effort.
 
It takes me a few dozen hours to scan the pages of a public domain  work.  I 
have a perfect right to expect payment for someone else to use  it.  That 
capitalism.
 
Will
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

2009-01-15 Thread Tracy Poff

On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 2:37 PM,   wrote:
> No it is not illegal to claim copyright over something to which you don't
> own copyright.  If you believe it is illegal, then perhaps you could cite  the
> law that states that, so we can review it.  If you have to prove  "intent to
> deceive" than I would suggest that the law you are thinking of, does  not
> specify copyright at all, but is more general.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/17/chapters/5/sections/section_506.html

"(c) Fraudulent Copyright Notice. - Any person who, with fraudulent
intent, places on any article a notice of copyright or words of the
same purport that such person knows to be false, or who, with
fraudulent intent, publicly distributes or imports for public
distribution any article bearing such notice or words that such person
knows to be false, shall be fined not more than $2,500."

My inexpert opinion is that convincing someone that they are required
to pay you to use the material bearing the false copyright notice
would be fraudulent intent, though I could be wrong.

-- 
Tracy Poff

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

2009-01-15 Thread Nathan

Looks interesting. If it were me, I would've written or copied at least a
few articles and other types of content and had the main page complete, as
an entryway. I'm also not sure I would have allowed four red links in the
"About us" section on the main page.

What is your plan for spreading the word about this project, out of
curiosity? At least part of the problem encountered by the other
Wikipedia-like projects is publicity - not enough people are aware of the
effort to make it successful *and *people prefer to contribute to a project
where there is a good likelihood that their work will be read and
appreciated. I wonder how you, unlike the other efforts, will overcome this
obstacle?

Nathan
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

Two questions:

1) What are you plans regarding incorporating content from other
projects? There is a good chance that Wikipedia will soon switch to a
license compatible with yours, so you could copy content across. Do
you plan to do so, and to what extent?

2) Your "About" page says:

"Other projects have attempted, and continue to attempt, to develop
free Internet encyclopedias—Wikipedia, Citizendium, Conservapedia,
Open-Site, Scholarpedia, Veropedia, and Wikinfo, to name a few—yet
have failed to produce reliable content, to attract a broad, diverse,
responsible, and democratic community, or to achieve widespread public
support."

I dispute that. Studies have shown that Wikipedia is as reliable as
conventional encyclopaedias, the wide range of subjects covered in
great depths shows we have a broad and diverse community, I haven't
seen anything to suggest the Wikipedia community is irresponsible, and
we don't try to be democratic so you're making a massive assumption
there that democracy is the best way to run such a project. As for
widespread public support, millions of dollars of donations over the
past couple of months suggests we don't have a problem there. So which
of those aspects are you suggesting Wikipedia has failed in?
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

2009/1/16  :
>
> In a message dated 1/15/2009 4:17:21 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> larsen.thoma...@gmail.com writes:
>
> - civil  and polite conduct is required, and no tolerance is shown for
> those people  whose intention is to cause disruption or  damage;>>
>
>
> -
>
> This brings up an interesting point.
> Is there any analysis of the history of the splitting of Wikis, by whom,
> when, for what reason, and the longer term result?
>
> Might make an interesting bit of research to chart these all.
>
> Will

Hudong may not be a split but it is apparently bigger than the English
wikipedia depending on what they are counting as an article.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoodong


-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

Hi Phil,

> And as a second question, license incompatibility? Really?

What license incompatibility?

—Thomas Larsen

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

Hi Phil,

> As a scholar, why would I prefer to contribute my content to epistemia
> instead of a peer-reviewed journal as is the expectation of my field?

You can choose where you want to contribute, or you can contribute to
both. I didn't say that you couldn't :-). What I said was that
Epistemia aims to maintain scholarly standards—in other words,
professional standards of writing, etc.

I invite you to contribute!

—Thomas Larsen

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia


On Jan 15, 2009, at 7:16 PM, Thomas Larsen wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I, with Richard Austin, would like to announce the public launch of
> "Epistemia", a new Internet-wiki-based encyclopedia project which may
> be found on the Web at http://epistemia.org/. Some of the project's
> distinguishing features include:

And as a second question, license incompatibility? Really?

-Phil


___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia


On Jan 15, 2009, at 7:16 PM, Thomas Larsen wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I, with Richard Austin, would like to announce the public launch of
> "Epistemia", a new Internet-wiki-based encyclopedia project which may
> be found on the Web at http://epistemia.org/. Some of the project's
> distinguishing features include:
>
> - the project places a high emphasis on developing and maintaining
> content according to established scholarly standards; and

As a scholar, why would I prefer to contribute my content to epistemia  
instead of a peer-reviewed journal as is the expectation of my field?

-Phil

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

Hi Alvaro,

> Even though I made myself an account, I'm gonna put an alarm on my
> iPod for 1 month more. If a considerable amount of articles have been
> created, I will start contributing. Let's hope it makes itself popular.

Thanks! I hope the project takes off myself, and that you'll start
contributing, either in a month, or at some other time ...

Cheers,

—Thomas Larsen

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

That sounds great.

Even though I made myself an account, I'm gonna put an alarm on my  
iPod for 1 month more. If a considerable amount of articles have been  
created, I will start contributing. Let's hope it makes itself popular.


--
Alvaro

On 15-01-2009, at 21:16, Thomas Larsen   
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I, with Richard Austin, would like to announce the public launch of
> "Epistemia", a new Internet-wiki-based encyclopedia project which may
> be found on the Web at http://epistemia.org/. Some of the project's
> distinguishing features include:
>
> - users are required to log in before being permitted to edit;
> - civil and polite conduct is required, and no tolerance is shown for
> those people whose intention is to cause disruption or damage;
> - people with administrative privileges are required to use their real
> names as their account names, with few exceptions;
> - the project places a high emphasis on developing and maintaining
> content according to established scholarly standards; and
> - policy (content, community, and project standards), which is still
> in development, is outlined clearly and simply on a single page.
>
> Wikipedia has undoubtedly proved the value of the wiki content
> production model, but it suffers from a number of damning flaws. Most
> serious is the negativity of the participatory culture that has
> developed on Wikipedia—incivility is rampant in discussions, logical,
> reasoned arguments are commonly ignored, and people acting maliciously
> or disruptively are tolerated far in excess of common sense.
> Governance is another issue, with the project led, not by the most
> knowledgeable people, but by the people with the most spare time and
> the loudest voices. Also of much concern, especially to academia, is
> the lack of consistent adherence to the conventional quality
> expectations associated with professional scholarship—indeed, many
> contributors reject established scholarly standards in favour of their
> own conception of what an encyclopedia should be like. These problems
> can be traced to two primary causes: firstly, an unprofessional
> culture, and, secondly, overly complex and inconsistently enforced
> rules. Epistemia aims to correct both these issues, without
> implementing the overly-restrictive mechanisms that Citizendium has.
>
> Raymond Arritt once summed it all up neatly—"[Citizendium] ... would
> be great if it were more similar to Wikipedia (easier to contribute,
> less bureaucratic) and ... [Wikipedia] ... would be great if it were
> more similar to Citizendium (less hostile to competence, more willing
> to act against troublemakers and those with an agenda)." Epistemia
> aims to be easy to contribute to, unbureaucratic, welcoming of
> competence, and intolerant of disruptive and malicious people.
>
> Well, Richard Austin and I would like to invite you to check it out
> yourself and formulate your own opinions—see http://epistemia.org/.
>
> Best and friendly regards,
>
> —Thomas Larsen
>
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

2009-01-15 Thread Brian

It's not a split, but Scholarpedia has been fantastically successful.

http://www.scholarpedia.org/

They've gotten authors whose names you will recognize but did not realize
were alive to write up the articles on their discoveries. Thats the project
goal - to get THE living expert on the subject to write the article.

On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 5:21 PM,  wrote:

>
> In a message dated 1/15/2009 4:17:21 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> larsen.thoma...@gmail.com writes:
>
> - civil  and polite conduct is required, and no tolerance is shown for
> those people  whose intention is to cause disruption or  damage;>>
>
>
> -
>
> This brings up an interesting point.
> Is there any analysis of the history of the splitting of Wikis, by whom,
> when, for what reason, and the longer term result?
>
> Might make an interesting bit of research to chart these all.
>
> Will
>
>
> **A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
> steps!
> (
> http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
> cemailfooterNO62
> )
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

 
In a message dated 1/15/2009 4:17:21 PM Pacific Standard Time,  
larsen.thoma...@gmail.com writes:

- civil  and polite conduct is required, and no tolerance is shown for
those people  whose intention is to cause disruption or  damage;>>


-
 
This brings up an interesting point.
Is there any analysis of the history of the splitting of Wikis, by whom,  
when, for what reason, and the longer term result?
 
Might make an interesting bit of research to chart these all.
 
Will
 
 
**A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia

Hi all,

I, with Richard Austin, would like to announce the public launch of
"Epistemia", a new Internet-wiki-based encyclopedia project which may
be found on the Web at http://epistemia.org/. Some of the project's
distinguishing features include:

- users are required to log in before being permitted to edit;
- civil and polite conduct is required, and no tolerance is shown for
those people whose intention is to cause disruption or damage;
- people with administrative privileges are required to use their real
names as their account names, with few exceptions;
- the project places a high emphasis on developing and maintaining
content according to established scholarly standards; and
- policy (content, community, and project standards), which is still
in development, is outlined clearly and simply on a single page.

Wikipedia has undoubtedly proved the value of the wiki content
production model, but it suffers from a number of damning flaws. Most
serious is the negativity of the participatory culture that has
developed on Wikipedia—incivility is rampant in discussions, logical,
reasoned arguments are commonly ignored, and people acting maliciously
or disruptively are tolerated far in excess of common sense.
Governance is another issue, with the project led, not by the most
knowledgeable people, but by the people with the most spare time and
the loudest voices. Also of much concern, especially to academia, is
the lack of consistent adherence to the conventional quality
expectations associated with professional scholarship—indeed, many
contributors reject established scholarly standards in favour of their
own conception of what an encyclopedia should be like. These problems
can be traced to two primary causes: firstly, an unprofessional
culture, and, secondly, overly complex and inconsistently enforced
rules. Epistemia aims to correct both these issues, without
implementing the overly-restrictive mechanisms that Citizendium has.

Raymond Arritt once summed it all up neatly—"[Citizendium] ... would
be great if it were more similar to Wikipedia (easier to contribute,
less bureaucratic) and ... [Wikipedia] ... would be great if it were
more similar to Citizendium (less hostile to competence, more willing
to act against troublemakers and those with an agenda)." Epistemia
aims to be easy to contribute to, unbureaucratic, welcoming of
competence, and intolerant of disruptive and malicious people.

Well, Richard Austin and I would like to invite you to check it out
yourself and formulate your own opinions—see http://epistemia.org/.

Best and friendly regards,

—Thomas Larsen

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] two-tiered ratings system (Was: To boldy delete what no one had deleted before!)

2009-01-15 Thread David Gerard

2009/1/15 Neil Harris :

> The last time we tried something like this, it degenerated into a
> massive discussion of which ratings parameters and rating methodology
> should be used[1], and nothing ever happened.


Yes, but that was a side issue - the reason it didn't happen was that
Brion didn't like the extension to implement it so it fell by the
wayside.

Your mission, should you choose to accept it:

0. get Brion and Tim to agree that this is something they wouldn't
actually be horrified to put on the site if it passed technical muster
and the community were going "hell yes" loud enough.
1. get the community support in place.
2. write something for MediaWiki that does this but that Brion and Tim
would be willing to put on the live servers.


- d.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] two-tiered ratings system (Was: To boldy delete what no one had deleted before!)

2009-01-15 Thread Neil Harris

David Gerard wrote:
>
> Another idea: make all ratings public information, because they're
> part of the process of working on the encyclopedia so should be
> viewable for transparency.
>
>
> - d.
>
>   
...which is also the correct answer to the problem of selecting any one 
particular rating algorithm in advance. By publishing the raw ratings 
data, with associated timestamp and userid, anyone will be able to 
analyze the data any way they like.

It would be fairly easy to institute such a rating system, given that we 
already have an integrated login and edittoken verification system: we 
just need a small form that generates an appropriate GET query on each 
page, and an extra table to stash the results into.

Dump that table into a downloadable text file at regular intervals, and 
you're done. Armies of programmers and statisticians will descend on the 
data to see what they can do with it. If they can do something useful 
with it, we could eventually integrate that analysis into the software. 
If not, the experiment can eventually be abandoned.

The last time we tried something like this, it degenerated into a 
massive discussion of which ratings parameters and rating methodology 
should be used[1], and nothing ever happened.

-- N.

[1] my suggestion: two rating parameters: importance and overall 
quality, each judged from 0 to 5. Matches current article rating system, 
has an even number of options. Three clicks, and you're done.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[WikiEN-l] CBC interview with Jimbo

2009-01-15 Thread William King

On Wikipedia Day, the CBC has an interview with Jimbo:

http://www.cbc.ca/arts/media/story/2009/01/15/jimmy-wales.html?ref=rss
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] two-tiered ratings system (Was: To boldy delete what no one had deleted before!)

2009-01-15 Thread Carcharoth

On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 7:44 PM, David Gerard  wrote:
> 2009/1/15 Ray Saintonge :
>> David Gerard wrote:
>
>>> Just ignoring the top and bottom 10% of ratings can do wonders for
>>> this sort of thing, by the way.
>
>> That would work, but may not be necessary if the number of raters is
>> large.  I suspect that the figures with and without truncation will tend
>> to converge. If a rating system of this sort were implemented it should
>> be an easily tested hypothesis.
>
>
> Another idea: make all ratings public information, because they're
> part of the process of working on the encyclopedia so should be
> viewable for transparency.

There is an option in preferences to switch on a gadget to display the
FA/A/GA/B/C/Start/Stub/Unassessed ratings (and the other categories
such as list and so on) on the article page not hidden on the talk
page. But as I said before, that is an editorial rating system, not a
reader rating system.

Carcharoth

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] two-tiered ratings system (Was: To boldy delete what no one had deleted before!)

2009-01-15 Thread Ray Saintonge

David Gerard wrote:
> 2009/1/15 Ray Saintonge:
>   
>> Yes, there will be some individuals determined to vote stupidly, but one
>> of the wonders of a statistical approach is that those efforts are soon
>> marginalized.
>> 
> Just ignoring the top and bottom 10% of ratings can do wonders for
> this sort of thing, by the way.
That would work, but may not be necessary if the number of raters is 
large.  I suspect that the figures with and without truncation will tend 
to converge. If a rating system of this sort were implemented it should 
be an easily tested hypothesis. 

Ec

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] two-tiered ratings system (Was: To boldy delete what no one had deleted before!)

2009-01-15 Thread David Gerard

2009/1/15 Ray Saintonge :
> David Gerard wrote:

>> Just ignoring the top and bottom 10% of ratings can do wonders for
>> this sort of thing, by the way.

> That would work, but may not be necessary if the number of raters is
> large.  I suspect that the figures with and without truncation will tend
> to converge. If a rating system of this sort were implemented it should
> be an easily tested hypothesis.


Another idea: make all ratings public information, because they're
part of the process of working on the encyclopedia so should be
viewable for transparency.


- d.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] two-tiered ratings system (Was: To boldy delete what no one had deleted before!)

2009-01-15 Thread Ray Saintonge

Neil Harris wrote:
> You should be able to do the whole thing in one go.
>
> It's a bit like clocks; accurate clocks are defined to be those which 
> tend to give similar times to other accurate clocks. Inaccurate clocks 
> do not have this property.
>   
With standards now depending on atomic clocks we now need to to add the 
occasional leap second to ensure that the earth behaves as it should in 
its journey around the sun. How would we clean the raters' clock?
> In this case, good raters are defined to be those who give ratings which 
> tend to correlate well with true ratings, which are in turn extracted by 
> ratings given by other good raters. Even though this is necessarily a 
> recursive definition, it can still be used to generate a tractable set 
> of simultaneous equations.
>
> "True" ratings being a matter of subjectivity, and people being people, 
> there may also be more than one mutually-coherent cluster of raters. If 
> you're worried about active coordinated attacks by ratings spammers, or 
> want to try to average across political viewpoints, you can seed things 
> with a core of users known to be likely to be both good and impartial 
> raters.
Proceeding in this vain [sic!], we are ultimately led to the great 
Rooto-Rater, and that problem is theological. :-)

Ec


___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...