[WikiEN-l] Re: Use of Wikipedia articles at Malaspina.com

Thu Jul 10 12:07:37 UTC 2003

People who are using the license are establishing custom and practice which
is also relevant. I cannot imagine archiving on my site the past history of
a Wikipedia page, the link back to Wikipedia gives access to that. As to law
being practical, we all try.

Fred Bauder

http://wwww.internet-encyclopedia.org

> From: steve vertigo <utilitymuffinresearch at yahoo.com>
> Reply-To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 01:54:10 -0700 (PDT)
> To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Use of Wikipedia articles at Malaspina.com
> 
>> I'm in no way an expert, but looking at the
>> practical implications of
>> such a requirement, it would seem that such a
>> requirement would make the
>> GFDL useless for most purposes. Hardly any webmaster
>> would archive every
>> past version of a page.
>> 
>> Timwi
> 
> Civil Law is not meant to be practical. It's meant
> merely to be a roadsign that says, "our stuff, our
> rules" -- so that later it can look like a breach of
> contract, and money can be restituted from the
> prostituting party.
> 
> Ironically, the notion that "your not supposed to make
> $$ off of  X" (as a claim) is kinda antithetical to
> the whole notion of lawsuits, which tend to be about
> "only Ims supposed to make money off X".  And in the
> end, regardless of GNUFDL, a civil win would be
> represented (symbolically) in dough.  Otherwise why
> would anyone bother forking out for a lair?
> 
> -S-
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> http://sbc.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l