On 25 April 2011 07:45, Joan Goma <jrg...@gmail.com> wrote: > They have copied articles from Chinese Wikipedia and translated articles > from English and Japanese Wikipedia so in my opinion their work is a > derivative one
This is true. > and according to the CCSA terms it is also CCSA no mater what > they say. No, this is absolutely not the case. The licence is a permission, not a viral infection (despite the confusion engendered by the licences being termed "viral" in another context). That you licence your work as CC by-sa does not make a further derivative automatically CC by-sa. It means that if they distribute it further (as they have) without obeying your licence (as they have not) and without releasing their changes as CC-by-sa (as they have not), then they are in violation (as they are). *But* this *still* does not automatically relicence their work - it just means they are in violation until they choose to do so. You can't forcibly relicence someone else's work without a court order, even if they are grossly violating your licence. You just can't. It doesn't work like that. > What about creating a bot to copy from Baidu all the articles not yet > existing in Chinese wikipedia. This is a terrible idea and you should not do it. - d. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
