Wikipedia / Copy Discussion

Sub-page of Wikipedia

Would it be ok to include pictures or texts from senseis at wikipedia? From a copyright perspective. Benni

Morten: WikiPedia is published under a different copyright regime than SL, and it is not obvious to me we can publish Wikipedia content here or vice versa. The rights and obligations under the SL OCL are not the same as those under the Wikipedia GFSL.

Specifically, what would you like to accomplish by copying an instance of the SL content as opposed to providing links on Wikipedia?

DougRidgway Maintaining two forks of the same information does seem like a bad idea, but I think Benni was just interested in sprucing up the Wikipedia entry a bit, relying on material from SL. Skimming the licenses, they seem so similar both in spirit and detail that it is difficult for me to imagine a copyright holder raising an irresolvable issue. These licenses are meant to be enabling, not disabling.

Velobici Wikipedia has the concept of being a single source of information. They discourage the use of external links (URLs that do not point to another page within Wikipedia) and relegate external links to an "External Links" section of each page. An example of this is the [ext] The game of Go page at Wikipedia...there is an "External links" section at the bottom of the page. SL appears in the "miscellaneous" section at the very bottom.

It is not clear to me what will be accomplished by copying content. How will this help the Go community? Why not have Wikipedia continue to provide a link to SL?

I just want to copy some pictures generated here in SL to some pages in the german wikipedia. There is no German counterpart of SL in the moment (and for me this is a to big project in the moment), so I just wanted to improve the German wikipedia just a bit with some examples for tesuji. instead of generating the images myself - which is of course not such a big deal I thought maybe I could take them from here.

I think the OCL is not comptible with the GFDL, which is used in Wikipedia, AFAIK. So, unfortunately I have to generate new material :-( Benni

DougRidgway (rant on, WME fodder) I realize it's perhaps easier to redo the content than to even read the licenses, much less get comfortable with all the legalities, but it seems to me that if people don't feel comfortable reusing / sampling / extending the content in such a similar context, maybe we're doing something wrong. The whole point of Open licenses, from the GPL onwards, is to enable and encourage copying and reuse. It seems ironic that slight (perhaps nonexistent, we could ask KfLenz) differences in two Open Content licenses would result in effectively undermining the basic purpose of both of them, because people don't feel comfortable copying from one to the other. (rant off)


This is a copy of the living page "Wikipedia / Copy Discussion" at Sensei's Library.
(OC) 2009 the Authors, published under the OpenContent License V1.0.
[Welcome to Sensei's Library!]
StartingPoints
ReferenceSection
About