Re: Legal advice

This is why we should have clearer submission standards.
One could argue that at present the text at the bottom of the
page gives the terms and conditions of submission (which are not
the same as the text being subsequently released once it is uploaded
from the browser). It says, "edited mercilessly at will". Thus when
one is giving permission to Wikipedia/Wikimedia to release the
text under GFDL, one is also giving permission for subsequent
users (including vandals, BTW) to blank one's whole article, or
even delete it.  This goes on at VfD, and I should point out that
such deletion occurs not only when there are copyright infringements,
but other times as well.

Making this more explicit in submission terms
would quash any argument. See the proposal here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Submission_Standards_(proposal)#Nature_of_your_submission
My hope is that this text really just codifies what is going on at
VfD and with people editing every day. Of course Wikiettiquette
prevents us from just blanking other people's work, we are, as a
community, looking to increase the storehouse of knowledge, not
destroy it.

Regarding the downstream licensee issue this is really something
separate from the uploading of content. If something is uploaded
that is not pure GFDL then the fair use implications would have to
be considered by any third parties, not by fellow Wikipedians who
are editing an article because they think by so doing they are stepping
on the GFDL grant of some other contributor. If someone forks a
Wikipedia article they can delete or add material, so why could that
not occur on Wikipedia?  Maybe I am not understanding the question.
Isn't every edit really a derivative work of prior contributors?
Alex

From: "Martin Harper" <martin-MAOR6hOrJ+i/zRsMOHpXgkbqmpVPkGQOWmv/[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>;
<[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2004 7:32 PM
Subject: [Wikilegal-l] Legal advice


> > User:Anthony DiPierro claims on Wikipedia:Possible copyright
infringements
> > that Wikipedia is violating his copyright by not releasing the entirety
of
> > an article he modified under GFDL (Al Gore) including images, some of
which
> > may have been used under fair use. The images were included after his
> > modifications. He claims the entire article, including images, must be
> > released under GFDL to avoid breaking the license. I'm not a lawyer, I'm
> > just confused (heh) and worried that this may become a problem..
probably
> > just me being weird.
>
> > - Evil saltine
>
> Firstly, legal questions should be posted to wikilegal-l (or resolved on
wikipedia, of
> course). I'm cross-posting this one.
>
> Some claim that we only release Wikipedia text under the GFDL, (see
> [[meta:permission grant extent]]). As far as I know, Jimbo has not
explicitly clarified
> this. However, this claim is not sustainable when the images are embedded
within
> the article using "inline links". In this case, the image and the text
form a single
> document.
>
> My reasoning is based on the various cases where people created HTML pages
that
> embedded content from another server - there are a bunch of examples at
> http://www.linksandlaw.com/linkingcases-framing.htm. In these cases, it
was argued
> that inline linking creates a derivative work. Note that the GFDL only
gives
> permission to create a derivative work if the resulting work is also
released under the
> GFDL.
>
> If the fair use image (or, indeed, quote) would probably also be fair use
for all
> (reasonable) downstream users, and its copyright status is explicitly
marked, then
> we're probably ok, but we do typically ask the image uploader to add as
much detail
> as they can on the image description page, so sub-licensees can decide
whether to
> take the risk. However, if the fair use claim relies heavily, on, for
example,
> Wikipedia's non-profit status, then we should remove it, and may be in
danger of
> infringing our contributors copyright.
>
> If an image is vital, note that normal linking (not "inline linking") does
NOT create a
> derivative work.
>
> -- Martin "IANAL" Harper
> _______________________________________________
> Wikilegal-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilegal-l