Baidupedia copyvio collections

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
110 messages Options
123456
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Baidupedia copyvio collections

Andrew Gray
2008/6/12 Titan Deng <[hidden email]>:

> No, it's not true. If you can read the list (the link I gave), those
> articles are not controversial articles, not sensitive to the Chinese
> government at all. Baidupedia has political censorship, and their staff
> review and filter all materials which might be regarded as sensitive to
> Chinese government.

I think this is a miscommunication - that is Henning's point. The
articles Baidu reuses are the politically unimportant ones, ones which
wouldn't need any censorship. As matters stand, Wikipedia can't get
these articles out into China; the firewall blocks the zh.wp articles
on Tiananmen Square and on cosmology without caring what's in them.

As a result, Baidu's copying of them means that people in China can at
least get *some* of our content, rather than none at all.

>> Of course it would be nice if they would acknowledge the license and
>> give proper attribution. But they can't - Wikipedia is banned and they
>> can't name this source.
>>
> The ban is not relative to their copyright violation. Wikipedia is not
> prohibited to mention. The Great Fire Wall blocks the website with its url (
> wikipedia.org).
> At least, according to GFDL, they can still mention 5 main authors instead
> of mentioning Wikipedia.

Mmm... this may work. Finding five main authors is so tricky that we
usually recommend a link to the wp history page, though - and a link
to a blocked site is pretty useless in terms of actually giving
attribution!

--
- Andrew Gray
 [hidden email]

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Baidupedia copyvio collections

Ray Saintonge
In reply to this post by Robert Stojnic-2
Robert Stojnic wrote:

> Dan, your comment about infringement as theft is relevant only for
> western societies. AFAIK, in China, there is a booming internet market,
> that is both aggressive and in search for its own identity and market
> share. Copyright is seen as one of those bad western thingies, that west
> nicely uses to drain China even more (lets not forget - the reason why
> you can buy stuff so cheaply in US is that some Chinese guy is working
> his butt off). So, it is controversial who steals what and from whom. My
> personal POV is that we steal from China far much more than they manage
> to steal from us. I personally think we should respect the specificities
> of the Chinese situation, and help create free knowledge and build
> cooperation, instead of trying to enforce western laws.
If you are going to build an analysis on the notion of theft and law
enforcement, you also need to acknowledge that the concepts of "market"
and "market share" are also a part of western capitalist thought.

My aim is not to enforce western laws as an end in themselves, but I
have no compunctions about using those laws as a tool. Free licences can
also be viewed as tools for achieving free knowledge.  If we really want
knowledge to be free we have to stop treating it as a market commodity.
Once it belongs to everybody it's no longer stealable.

Ec

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Baidupedia copyvio collections

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
In reply to this post by Dan Rosenthal
Dan Rosenthal wrote:

> But that's exactly what Baidupedia has done. The assurances to every single
> person who has ever contributed to a WMF project are undermined as long as
> Baidupedia uses our content while claiming it as their own, under copyright.
> It is not copying. Copying would be merely them reusing the content. It's
> their claim that THEY were the authors, that it belongs to them, that it is
> something they could potentially sue you over. That is the theft; the theft
> of the authorship and ownership rights of the Wikipedian who wrote the
> content. It is fundamentally unacceptable that we support that.

I may be grossly misreading what you just wrote above, or just not
being well enough informed about all the statements about our
licencing system on-wiki, but just to clarify; what precise
"assurances" are you talking about?

Yours,

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen




_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Baidupedia copyvio collections

Titan Deng
In reply to this post by Andrew Gray
2008/6/13 Andrew Gray <[hidden email]>:

> 2008/6/12 Titan Deng <[hidden email]>:
>
> > No, it's not true. If you can read the list (the link I gave), those
> > articles are not controversial articles, not sensitive to the Chinese
> > government at all. Baidupedia has political censorship, and their staff
> > review and filter all materials which might be regarded as sensitive to
> > Chinese government.
>
> I think this is a miscommunication - that is Henning's point. The
> articles Baidu reuses are the politically unimportant ones, ones which
> wouldn't need any censorship. As matters stand, Wikipedia can't get
> these articles out into China; the firewall blocks the zh.wp articles
> on Tiananmen Square and on cosmology without caring what's in them.
>
> As a result, Baidu's copying of them means that people in China can at
> least get *some* of our content, rather than none at all.
>

By the way, Chinese Wikipedia is not only contributed by mainland Chinese
users. Most of new articles are written by Taiwanese and Hong Kong
Wikipedians.
This time the issue is brought up due to a complaint from a Taiwanese
Wikipedian who is a main author of a featured article which has been copied
to Baidu for months.
In Wikimania 2007 press conference, Florence mentioned Baidu's copyright
infringement. Several days later Baidu had an official response stating that
Wikimedia's accusation unreasonable, because their policy prohibits copyvio
materials.
(
http://big5.xinhuanet.com/gate/big5/news.xinhuanet.com/internet/2007-08/07/content_6486399.htm
)
Baidu is a very bad example which might imply that other Chinese website
could use Wikimedian contents without following GFDL.


>
> >> Of course it would be nice if they would acknowledge the license and
> >> give proper attribution. But they can't - Wikipedia is banned and they
> >> can't name this source.
> >>
> > The ban is not relative to their copyright violation. Wikipedia is not
> > prohibited to mention. The Great Fire Wall blocks the website with its
> url (
> > wikipedia.org).
> > At least, according to GFDL, they can still mention 5 main authors
> instead
> > of mentioning Wikipedia.
>
> Mmm... this may work. Finding five main authors is so tricky that we
> usually recommend a link to the wp history page, though - and a link
> to a blocked site is pretty useless in terms of actually giving
> attribution!
>

I think legally speaking it's not our responsibility to find ways for them
to give attribution to the authors.  It is not reasonable they use those
articles and at the same time they need us to provide legal ways to them.
Just too over.

Titan

>
> --
> - Andrew Gray
>  [hidden email]
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>



--
Support the Wikimedia Foundation: http://donate.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Baidupedia copyvio collections

Ray Saintonge
In reply to this post by Henning Schlottmann
Henning Schlottmann wrote:

> Last time I checked, Wikipedia was about disseminating free knowledge.
> Unfortunately the projects are blocked by the Chinese government, so
> people of the peoples republic have no access to our content, not the
> the parts that are deemed dangerous by the government, not to the other
> parts. Now someone takes at least some of the uncontroversial content
> and makes it available by copying into Baidu.
>
> Of course it would be nice if they would acknowledge the license and
> give proper attribution. But they can't - Wikipedia is banned and they
> can't name this source.
>
> But as our mission is to distribute our knowledge, I believe this is the
> second best way to distribute our articles, and the best available until
> the forces that are open up the Great Firewall.
This seems like one of those end-justifies-the-means arguments. It
compromises principles for the sake of expediency.  If we want knowledge
to be free we also want it to remain free.  Acknowledging the licence is
more than being "nice", it's essential to free knowledge.

Ec

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Baidupedia copyvio collections

Titan Deng
In reply to this post by Effe iets anders
Dear Lodewijk,

I think we did send them letter to ask them to remove articles in 2006, in
the name of Chinese Wikipedian community.
But we got no response. I know it's not easy to deal with this issue, since
WMF is not the copyright holder.
We do the collection in case one day we will use, no matter we use it for
legal purpose or others.

:)

Regards,
Titan

2008/6/11 effe iets anders <[hidden email]>:

> Just a weird question maybe, but has it been tried to just write them
> a letter and ask to remove the content? Please note that WMF is nto
> the author of the content, and does not own the content. individual
> authors such as yourself could of course. Therefore i doubt she could
> enforce the GFDL requirements. Or are you suggestion rather press/pr
> action?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Lodewijk
>
> 2008/6/11 Titan Deng <[hidden email]>:
> > Hi,
> >
> > We Chinese Wikipedians are now collecting Baidupedia articles which were
> > copied from Chinese Wikipedia.
> >
> http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:%E7%99%BE%E5%BA%A6%E7%99%BE%E7%A7%91%E5%B0%8D%E7%B6%AD%E5%9F%BA%E7%99%BE%E7%A7%91%E7%9A%84%E4%BE%B5%E6%AC%8A
> > You may click the link above to see how many they are. (We put "Featured
> > articles", "Good articles", "DYK and other general articles" in groups.)
> > Baidupedia users not only copied from zh.wp, but also from ja.wp and
> en.wp.
> > I think we could now do the evidence collection works first, and I hope
> the
> > list could be useful if one day the WMF takes some action to Baidu.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Titan
> > --
> > Support the Wikimedia Foundation: http://donate.wikimedia.org
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>



--
Support the Wikimedia Foundation: http://donate.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Baidupedia copyvio collections

Ray Saintonge
In reply to this post by David Goodman
David Goodman wrote:
> do they copy as a mirror would, and then add articles of their own, or
> do they use the text as part of articles with additions & subtractions
> of their own?
I believe it's the latter.  They are of course free to edit as they
will; that's allowed even if the editing is grossly distorted.  Another
important feature of GFDL is the viral effect that incorporating
licensed material will have on the copyright of the new usage.

Ec

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Baidupedia copyvio collections

KIZU Naoko
In reply to this post by Ray Saintonge
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 2:41 AM, Ray Saintonge <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Henning Schlottmann wrote:
>> Last time I checked, Wikipedia was about disseminating free knowledge.
>> Unfortunately the projects are blocked by the Chinese government, so
>> people of the peoples republic have no access to our content, not the
>> the parts that are deemed dangerous by the government, not to the other
>> parts. Now someone takes at least some of the uncontroversial content
>> and makes it available by copying into Baidu.
>>
>> Of course it would be nice if they would acknowledge the license and
>> give proper attribution. But they can't - Wikipedia is banned and they
>> can't name this source.
>>
>> But as our mission is to distribute our knowledge, I believe this is the
>> second best way to distribute our articles, and the best available until
>> the forces that are open up the Great Firewall.
> This seems like one of those end-justifies-the-means arguments. It
> compromises principles for the sake of expediency.  If we want knowledge
> to be free we also want it to remain free.  Acknowledging the licence is
> more than being "nice", it's essential to free knowledge.
>
> Ec

Fully agreed with Ec. Acknowledgjng the license is acknowledging the
document in concersn are free: without that, it may be wrongly claimed
to be copyrighted, and hindered further distribution. License issue is
crucial in my understanding to ensure the knowledge we've accumulated
free in the true meaning.


--
KIZU Naoko
http://d.hatena.ne.jp/Britty (in Japanese)
Quote of the Day (English): http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/WQ:QOTD

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Baidupedia copyvio collections

Dan Rosenthal
In reply to this post by Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 1:35 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Dan Rosenthal wrote:
>
> > But that's exactly what Baidupedia has done. The assurances to every
> single
> > person who has ever contributed to a WMF project are undermined as long
> as
> > Baidupedia uses our content while claiming it as their own, under
> copyright.
> > It is not copying. Copying would be merely them reusing the content. It's
> > their claim that THEY were the authors, that it belongs to them, that it
> is
> > something they could potentially sue you over. That is the theft; the
> theft
> > of the authorship and ownership rights of the Wikipedian who wrote the
> > content. It is fundamentally unacceptable that we support that.
>
> I may be grossly misreading what you just wrote above, or just not
> being well enough informed about all the statements about our
> licencing system on-wiki, but just to clarify; what precise
> "assurances" are you talking about?
>
> Yours,
>
> Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
>
>
> The assurances that I am talking about are the statements that "by clicking
submit you are agreeing to license your submission under the GFDL". The GFDL
requires attribution. By requiring that our contributors use the GFDL (or
CC-BY-SA, or any other attribution required license), we are giving an
assurance to our contributors that their work will remain attributed to
them, and if it is not attributed to them they shall have some sort of
remedies available to them.

By tacitly accepting Baidupedia's actions, we're undermining that assurance,
by saying "Look, here's a wide swath of our work that is NOT attributed, and
there's nothing that guarantees your work won't be included in it, and we're
not going to do anything about it".

That's a huge turn-off to potential contributors.




--
Dan Rosenthal
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Baidupedia copyvio collections

Dan Rosenthal
In reply to this post by Ray Saintonge
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 1:22 PM, Ray Saintonge <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> If you are going to build an analysis on the notion of theft and law
> enforcement, you also need to acknowledge that the concepts of "market"
> and "market share" are also a part of western capitalist thought.
>
> My aim is not to enforce western laws as an end in themselves, but I
> have no compunctions about using those laws as a tool. Free licences can
> also be viewed as tools for achieving free knowledge.  If we really want
> knowledge to be free we have to stop treating it as a market commodity.
> Once it belongs to everybody it's no longer stealable.
>
> Ec
>
>
Unless I'm seriously misunderstanding your position, I believe you and I are
of the same mind here.

--
Dan Rosenthal
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Baidupedia copyvio collections

Dan Rosenthal
In reply to this post by KIZU Naoko
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 2:09 PM, Aphaia <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Fully agreed with Ec. Acknowledgjng the license is acknowledging the
> document in concersn are free: without that, it may be wrongly claimed
> to be copyrighted, and hindered further distribution. License issue is
> crucial in my understanding to ensure the knowledge we've accumulated
> free in the true meaning.
>
>
>
Not just "may be" wrongly claimed, it IS being wrongly claimed. And as I
said earlier, not only does that hinder further distribution (because people
will see copyright symbols and assume  incorrectly that it actually is
non-free content) but it also hinders further creation of new free works
when people cannot be adequately assured that their licenses will be
respected.

--
Dan Rosenthal
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Baidupedia copyvio collections

Judson Dunn-2
In reply to this post by Dan Rosenthal
For reference, here's what the FSF does

http://www.fsf.org/licensing/compliance

Basically they do actively investigate everything, and then file suit
based on the violated parts that they do have copyright for. (bash,
wget etc) while working with the other infringed copyright holders.

Maybe that model can be used for the WMF also, although I'm not sure
if they have any component violated text.

Just FYI :)

Judson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cohesion

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikitech-l] iPhone Application

Judson Dunn-2
In reply to this post by Casey Brown-3
I am fairly confident that unrelated developers will create a better
solution in less time than if the foundation tried something.

http://www.theiphoneblog.com/2008/06/12/review-websearch-native-app-a-week/

That's just one example from before the app store is even running,
they will only get better.

This is a good thing, and a benefit of our open content model. :)

Judson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cohesion

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Baidupedia copyvio collections

Andrew Gray
In reply to this post by Dan Rosenthal
2008/6/12 Dan Rosenthal <[hidden email]>:

>> I may be grossly misreading what you just wrote above, or just not
>> being well enough informed about all the statements about our
>> licencing system on-wiki, but just to clarify; what precise
>> "assurances" are you talking about?

> The assurances that I am talking about are the statements that "by clicking
> submit you are agreeing to license your submission under the GFDL". The GFDL
> requires attribution. By requiring that our contributors use the GFDL (or
> CC-BY-SA, or any other attribution required license), we are giving an
> assurance to our contributors that their work will remain attributed to
> them, and if it is not attributed to them they shall have some sort of
> remedies available to them.

Whoa.

Saying "you agree to license it" is *really* not the same as "you
agree to license it and we will enforce that licence for you", and I'm
not sure we can assume everyone interprets it as being the latter.

--
- Andrew Gray
 [hidden email]

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Baidupedia copyvio collections

Henning Schlottmann
In reply to this post by Dan Rosenthal
Dan Rosenthal wrote:
> This may be a cultural difference between you and I then. In the U.S.,
> intellectual property is property.

This issue is not about the law - it is about politics. The law is
perfectly clear. But the true question is:

Do we want at least some of our content to be distributed to mainland
China so much, that we accept it is done by breaking the law?

And of course no one can stop an individual contributor to zh-WP from
suing Baidu in any legal system and country, where Baidu has assets, for
infringing his or her copyright. But posters in this thread repeated
demanded that the Foundation get active to support the claims of
individual authors.

For one, this is not possible under the current license (and any planned
revision I have heard of). And: I don't think it would be wise, because
I prefer getting at least some of our content inside the country over
not getting it in and supporting starving IP lawyers.

The Great Firewall is a fact. And insisting on license issues and
attribution would unfortunately be playing the game of the powers that
are in the Peoples Republic. Because that would prohibit the people
there from accessing even the noncontroversial content, that was
available to them, because someone considered the distribution of
knowledge more important then IP law. I think it is a safe bet, that
Baidu will not attribute the content to Wikipedia authors and will not
put parts of their system under the GFDL.

And beyond the issue at hand: There are so many infringing mirrors out
there, that a service in China that hosts a bunch of non related
articles copied by individuals is insignificant.

Ciao Henning


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Baidupedia copyvio collections

George William Herbert
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 12:35 PM, Henning Schlottmann
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Dan Rosenthal wrote:
>> This may be a cultural difference between you and I then. In the U.S.,
>> intellectual property is property.
>
> This issue is not about the law - it is about politics. The law is
> perfectly clear. But the true question is:
>
> Do we want at least some of our content to be distributed to mainland
> China so much, that we accept it is done by breaking the law?
>
> And of course no one can stop an individual contributor to zh-WP from
> suing Baidu in any legal system and country, where Baidu has assets, for
> infringing his or her copyright. But posters in this thread repeated
> demanded that the Foundation get active to support the claims of
> individual authors.
>
> For one, this is not possible under the current license (and any planned
> revision I have heard of). And: I don't think it would be wise, because
> I prefer getting at least some of our content inside the country over
> not getting it in and supporting starving IP lawyers.
>
> The Great Firewall is a fact. And insisting on license issues and
> attribution would unfortunately be playing the game of the powers that
> are in the Peoples Republic. Because that would prohibit the people
> there from accessing even the noncontroversial content, that was
> available to them, because someone considered the distribution of
> knowledge more important then IP law. I think it is a safe bet, that
> Baidu will not attribute the content to Wikipedia authors and will not
> put parts of their system under the GFDL.
>
> And beyond the issue at hand: There are so many infringing mirrors out
> there, that a service in China that hosts a bunch of non related
> articles copied by individuals is insignificant.
>
> Ciao Henning

You're setting up a false dichotomy here.  The options are not "Allow
Baidu to do whatever they want" and "Deny China any access to
Wikipedia articles", with nothing in between.

Baidu could entirely credibly copy or mirror over Wikipedia articles,
with GFDL and author history, just as easily as their users cut and
paste now.  If the political situation is such that they can't grab
"the whole set" of wikipedia articles, that's unfortunate, but doesn't
prevent them from taking a subset *under the licenses and with
credit*.

We *can* and should ask them to put proper licenses and copyrights up.

We *should not* try and force them to take down the articles.


--
-george william herbert
[hidden email]

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Baidupedia copyvio collections

Andrew Gray-3
In reply to this post by Titan Deng
2008/6/12 Titan Deng <[hidden email]>:

>> Mmm... this may work. Finding five main authors is so tricky that we
>> usually recommend a link to the wp history page, though - and a link
>> to a blocked site is pretty useless in terms of actually giving
>> attribution!
>
> I think legally speaking it's not our responsibility to find ways for them
> to give attribution to the authors.  It is not reasonable they use those
> articles and at the same time they need us to provide legal ways to them.
> Just too over.

I think if we want them to provide attribution, it is a good thing for
us to try and make that process as easy and efficient for them as
possible. With normal mirrors - ones that don't operate behind the
Great Firewall - we have a pretty good record of getting attribution
sorted out, because we can email them and say very clearly and simply
what they need to do - and because it's painless, they can do it
without it costing them anything.

If we demanded those mirrors do a lot of work, on the other hand, we'd
get a much lower success rate.

The three obvious options for giving attribution:

a) Do what everyone else does, and link to the Wikipedia article
histories. Except that's meaningless for most of the readers - the
vast majority of them who live in mainland China won't be able to
follow the link, and the GFDL probably frowns a bit on a list of
authors which you aren't allowed to see...

b) Say "is taken from Wikipedia", or "copyright Wikipedia", without
the link, but this is in violation of the GFDL, just in a different
way.

c) Import full Wikipedia histories - thus giving attribution. However,
this runs into problems in that it provides a vast amount of new
material needing vetted, and so means a lot more editorial oversight
is needed from Baidu. Probably expensive.

c) Figure out main authors for each and every article, and attribute
them (without links?) in the Baidu articles. Aha, problem solved.

This last one is obviously the best option, but how would they get
those main authors? Working them all out by hand is incredibly
time-consuming when you have an even moderately long article, so for
it to be practical we need some way of generating them en masse.

It's a thorny problem even for us, and you'd expect us to be the
experts - we've tried before and never really found a method that's
reliable. If we want Baidu to do something like this, we'd stand a
much better chance if we can find some way of generating those authors
for them in advance, or identify an easy method they can use to do
so.*

If we just say "well, they can sort it out themselves, but they ought
to do something", it strikes me that we're going to just make it less
likely the problem ever gets fixed.

--
- Andrew Gray
 [hidden email]

* You know what would be really cool? Some kind of API that takes a
pagename or revision ID, crunches the article history, and spits back
five major authors.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Baidupedia copyvio collections

Ray Saintonge
In reply to this post by Dan Rosenthal
Dan Rosenthal wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 1:22 PM, Ray Saintonge wrote:
>  
>> If you are going to build an analysis on the notion of theft and law
>> enforcement, you also need to acknowledge that the concepts of "market"
>> and "market share" are also a part of western capitalist thought.
>>
>> My aim is not to enforce western laws as an end in themselves, but I
>> have no compunctions about using those laws as a tool. Free licences can
>> also be viewed as tools for achieving free knowledge.  If we really want
>> knowledge to be free we have to stop treating it as a market commodity.
>> Once it belongs to everybody it's no longer stealable.
>>    
> Unless I'm seriously misunderstanding your position, I believe you and I are
> of the same mind here.
>
>  
I agree.

Our disagreement on the use of the word "theft" is really a secondary
issue.  I do think it's one of those loaded words that only serves to
ratchet up the rhetoric.  "Infringement" is a much less inflammatory word.

Ec

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Baidupedia copyvio collections

Ray Saintonge
In reply to this post by Dan Rosenthal
Dan Rosenthal wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 2:09 PM, Aphaia <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>> Fully agreed with Ec. Acknowledgjng the license is acknowledging the
>> document in concersn are free: without that, it may be wrongly claimed
>> to be copyrighted, and hindered further distribution. License issue is
>> crucial in my understanding to ensure the knowledge we've accumulated
>> free in the true meaning.
>>    
> Not just "may be" wrongly claimed, it IS being wrongly claimed. And as I
> said earlier, not only does that hinder further distribution (because people
> will see copyright symbols and assume  incorrectly that it actually is
> non-free content) but it also hinders further creation of new free works
> when people cannot be adequately assured that their licenses will be
> respected.
>
>  
This happens more frequently than it should.  Very few modern books
don't have a copyright notice; this includes reprints of old books that
are indisputably in the public domain.  The new copyright only applies
to new material like a new introduction.  It may also apply to
compilations and formatting, but very few publishers are in a hurry to
clarify these limits.

Ec

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Baidupedia copyvio collections

Ray Saintonge
In reply to this post by Andrew Gray-3
Andrew Gray wrote:

> If we demanded those mirrors do a lot of work, on the other hand, we'd
> get a much lower success rate.
>
> The three obvious options for giving attribution:
>
> a) Do what everyone else does, and link to the Wikipedia article
> histories. Except that's meaningless for most of the readers - the
> vast majority of them who live in mainland China won't be able to
> follow the link, and the GFDL probably frowns a bit on a list of
> authors which you aren't allowed to see...
>
>  
I'm inclined to favour this option.  For the users of Baidu outside of
the PRC there will of course be no problems.  PRC residents will still
get their usual results to indicate a blocked site.  Each time it will
be a reminder to them that something is wrong, and they will be more
inclined to attempt access through alternate channels.  We shouldn't
underestimate the ability of the average PRC computer geek to circumvent
blocks.


Ec

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
123456