Extracting concepts and other facts is perfectly legal. If unacknowleged
(Which is standard Wikipedia operating practice and WRONG) this may be
plagarism but is not a copyright violation. Neither ideas or facts can be
copyrighted.
Fred
From: Mathias Schindler <neubau(a)presroi.de>
Reply-To: wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 18:24:27 +0200
To: Mailingliste der deutschsprachigen Wikipedia <wikide-l(a)Wikipedia.org>rg>,
wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org
Subject: [Wikipedia-l] "Why Wikipedia Sucks. Big Time"
http://homepage.univie.ac.at/horst.prillinger/blog/archives/2004/06/index.h…
#000623
Eine Perle:
"Text and concepts for Wikipedia entries are often blatantly copied from
other websites. To avoid instant recognition, the text is sometimes
rewritten, adding inaccuracies, inconsistencies or even errors. Due to
the nature of the content and the open format of Wikipedia, no copyright
holder can do anything about this."
(I don't agree with this text but I find it interesting to read most
objections to wikipedia condensed on a single non-wikipedia-affiliated page)
Sonnenscheinverwöhnte bitte wegschauen..
Nicht, daß ich glaube, daß er das Prinzip in der letzten Konsequenz
verstanden hat...
Mathias
--
nach uns der synflood.
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l