We have a publisher who have created a few hundred thousand books based on Wikipedia text. Here is an example of one of many https://books.google.ca/books?id=aQPMAwAAQBAJ&pg=PT100
They do not attribute Wikipedia and they do not release the content under a CC BY SA 3.0 license. They claim copyright to the material themselves and are selling it / misleading the people who by the books. I have reached out to them and they refuse to comply with our license even after being asked. Should we take legal action against them? IMO yes we should. While we should ask people to follow our license before taking action, if they refuse than we should follow through with enforcement. James On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 5:50 AM, Todd Allen <toddmal...@gmail.com> wrote: > The CC-BY-SA license asks for a basic courtesy: You give an acknowledgement > to the person who graciously let you use their work totally free. > > It takes all of five seconds to add "Photo by ___________" to a caption. It > takes very little more to add a note that the photo is CC licensed. I can > see why people are a bit put out when someone won't do these very minimal > things in exchange for a rich library of free (as in speech and beer) > material. > > Todd > > On Mar 1, 2017 10:44 PM, "rupert THURNER" <rupert.thur...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > on the german wikipedia there was a poll to ban images of users who > > send cease and desist letters, triggered by a recent case of thomas > > wolf trying to charge 1200 euro out of a tiny non-profit which > > improperly reused one of his images [1]. thomas article work includs > > "improving text deserts, and changing bad images to (often his own) > > better quality images"[2]. there is a broad majority against people > > who use cease and desist letters as a business model. anyway a small > > number of persons do have such a business model, some of them even > > administrators on commons, like alexander savin [3][4]. > > > > but the topic of course is much more subtle than described above, the > > discussion was heated, and the result close - as always in the last 10 > > years. a digital divide between persons supporting the original > > mindset of wikipedia which sees every additional reuse, unrestricted, > > as success, and the ones who think it is not desired to incorrectly > > reference, or feel that others should not make money out of their > > work. > > > > as both are viable opinions would it be possible to split commons in > > two, for every opinion? the new commons would include safe licenses > > like cc-4.0 and users who are friendly to update their licenses to > > better ones in future. the old commons would just stay as it is. a > > user of wikipedia can easy distinguish if she wants to include both > > sources, or only one of them? there is only one goal: make cease and > > desist letters as business model not interesting any more, > > technically, while keeping the morale of contributors high, both > > sides. > > > > [1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meinungsbilder/ > > keine_Bilder_in_Artikelnamensraum_von_direkt_abmahnenden_Fotografen > > [2] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spezial:Beitr%C3%A4ge/Der_Wolf_im_Wald > > [3] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:A.Savin > > [4] https://tarnkappe.info/ausgesprochen-peinlich-abmahnfalle-wikipedia- > > interview-mit-simplicius/ > > > > best > > rupert > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > -- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
