On 9/9/05, Daniel Mayer <maveric149(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
--- Jimmy Wales <jwales(a)wikia.com> wrote:
Daniel Mayer wrote:
Bullocks. This is legal paranoia.
I'm sorry, but acting carefully on advice from actual lawyers is not
legal paranoia.
A legal team who was split on the issue. I suggested a very simple way to avoid
much of the potential issues; combine the lists. Thus my 'bullocks' statement
in regards to deletion instead of merger. Deletion followed by nothing (what
was done) is legal paranoia, while merger is a prudent compromise.
Simply combining the lists doesn't solve the problem, as it could be
deemed to be a derivative work, as others have pointed out.
Beyond that,
of course I agree with the current concept of creating a
generally researched list from many sources of topics which we don't
have but should.
My point all along (IIRC, the first comment on the Encarta list talk page was
from me raising the merger issue).
But there is a difference between having the list available to a
restricted list of folks, or putting on meta: or in the en:Wikipedia:
namespace which is effectively "published."
For example, as part of my research, I have several "article lists"
from Encarta, Britannica and some other CD-ROM encyclopedias, but I've
hesitated to make them public or contribute them to WP, for exactly
this reason. Talking to a few lawyer folks on my campus has
effectively convinced me I would not have a strong case for fair
use/fair dealing. I'm willing to (and would like to be) proved wrong.
-Andrew (User:Fuzheado)