Difference between revisions of "Wikipedia copyright"
(Wikipedia uses a byzantine system of rules -- as one might expect from its predominantly liberal editors.) |
(update to reflect that all of WP's articles are CC-BY-SA licensed) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | Wikipedia uses a burdensome and complex system of copyrights, including statements like "any page which does not incorporate text that is exclusively available under CC-BY-SA or a CC-BY-SA-compatible license is also available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License" (GFDL).<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reusing_Wikipedia_content</ref> Wikipedia uses a byzantine system of rules -- as one might expect from its predominantly liberal editors. Authors always remain free to copy their own work, but cannot copy work that has been edited by others unless they comply fully with the requirements of | + | Wikipedia uses a burdensome and complex system of copyrights, including statements like "any page which does not incorporate text that is exclusively available under the CC-BY-SA (Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike) license or a CC-BY-SA-compatible license is also available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License" (GFDL).<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reusing_Wikipedia_content</ref> Wikipedia uses a byzantine system of rules -- as one might expect from its predominantly liberal editors. Authors always remain free to copy their own work, but cannot copy work that has been edited by others unless they comply fully with the requirements of CC-BY-SA.<ref>For articles with no edits after 2009, anyone who wishes to reuse Wikipedia content ''may'' instead follow the terms of the GFDL.</ref> |
| − | The basic requirements of the | + | The basic requirements of the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike license are the following: |
| − | + | *The work must attribute the authors in a specified manner (but not in a way that suggests endorsement) | |
| − | + | *If the work is "alter[ed], transform[ed], or [built] upon," it must be distributed under "the same or similar license"<ref>[http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ Creative Commons ShareAlike License Deed]</ref> | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | A lengthier, legal document describes the terms of the license in more detail. | |
As with [[Conservapedia]]'s terms, no special exceptions are made for teaching or other non-profit uses, but in both cases the [[fair use]] provisions of [[copyright law]] apply. | As with [[Conservapedia]]'s terms, no special exceptions are made for teaching or other non-profit uses, but in both cases the [[fair use]] provisions of [[copyright law]] apply. | ||
| − | [[Conservapedia]]'s copyright conditions are generally less restrictive and easier-to-use, but may be revoked "in very rare instances of self-defense" and do not allow for entire sections of the site to be copied or mirrored, unlike | + | [[Conservapedia]]'s copyright conditions are generally less restrictive and easier-to-use, but may be revoked "in very rare instances of self-defense" and do not allow for entire sections of the site to be copied or mirrored, unlike CC-BY-SA 3.0. For details, see [[Conservapedia:Copyright]]. |
== References == | == References == | ||
Revision as of 01:51, March 29, 2012
Wikipedia uses a burdensome and complex system of copyrights, including statements like "any page which does not incorporate text that is exclusively available under the CC-BY-SA (Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike) license or a CC-BY-SA-compatible license is also available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License" (GFDL).[1] Wikipedia uses a byzantine system of rules -- as one might expect from its predominantly liberal editors. Authors always remain free to copy their own work, but cannot copy work that has been edited by others unless they comply fully with the requirements of CC-BY-SA.[2]
The basic requirements of the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike license are the following:
- The work must attribute the authors in a specified manner (but not in a way that suggests endorsement)
- If the work is "alter[ed], transform[ed], or [built] upon," it must be distributed under "the same or similar license"[3]
A lengthier, legal document describes the terms of the license in more detail.
As with Conservapedia's terms, no special exceptions are made for teaching or other non-profit uses, but in both cases the fair use provisions of copyright law apply.
Conservapedia's copyright conditions are generally less restrictive and easier-to-use, but may be revoked "in very rare instances of self-defense" and do not allow for entire sections of the site to be copied or mirrored, unlike CC-BY-SA 3.0. For details, see Conservapedia:Copyright.
References
- ↑ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reusing_Wikipedia_content
- ↑ For articles with no edits after 2009, anyone who wishes to reuse Wikipedia content may instead follow the terms of the GFDL.
- ↑ Creative Commons ShareAlike License Deed
