Debate:Can/May/Should online wiki encyclopedias copy from each other?

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

There are many online wiki encyclopedias. On this side of the political spectrum, I can name offhand CP, aSK, and CreationWiki; on the other side, there are Liberalpedia, Uncyclopedia (well, ok, parody), and the great giant Wikipedia. Some of these definitely have better articles on certain topics than others, and they could all progress faster if they could use one anothers' work. So, should they?

I think these three questions are the basic issues that need to be answered. If you really think there's another major point, go ahead and start another heading - but I expect these will prove sufficient. --EvanW 16:41, 11 December 2009 (EST)

Is it legal?

I'm no lawyer, but I think this ought to be pretty cut-and-dry based on the licenses employed by the individual sites. Whether my interpretations are correct is another matter, but here goes: Wikipedia for example is mostly licensed under GFDL and CC-BY-SA 3, which allows text to be copied as long as it is released under a similar license. Since Conservapedia's copyright terms are more permissive, it is impossible for CP to use content from Wikipedia (unless a page were under a different license from the rest of CP). If memory serves, Citizendium is also under CC-BY-SA 3, so copying from there to CP is impossible, though as I understand it copying from there to WP would be possible. As far as I can tell from Conservapedia:Copyright, it should be possible to copy content from CP to WP without attribution, unless this were specifically revoked in some case. No doubt Andy will correct my misunderstandings here! --JimR 16:50, 11 December 2009 (EST)

If so, is it ethical?

Yes. People contribute to all of these websites to freely share knowledge. If they did not want the material to be shared and reused, they would have posted their writings on a copyrighted blog or other forum. Wschact 09:20, 22 July 2012 (EDT)

If so, should they do it?