On 04/25/11 7:06 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
I always thought that translations were considered wholely derivative,
that is that a new copyright is *not* created, by translating.
It would be nice if things could be that easy; a third person using the
translation must respect the copyright of
It's my understanding that sweat of the brown does not create a copyright
at all.
That was the entire argument behind the claim that phonebooks had no
copyright protection.
Similarly pure indexes have no copyright protection since they exhibit no
creativity at all.
Bad news for indexers.
On 26/04/11 02:37, Dan Collins wrote:
[...]
The main problem is that they are plain text instead of HTML.
This is most certainly /not/ a problem. What would be a problem would be if
MediaWiki chose to jump on the bandwagon of embedding huge external images
in emails to users. Bandwidth?
Hello,
2011/4/26 MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com:
wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
It's my understanding that sweat of the brown does not create a
copyright at all. That was the entire argument behind the claim that
phonebooks had no copyright protection. Similarly pure indexes have no
copyright
--
Message: 9
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 23:46:41 -0700
From: Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] foundation-l Digest, Vol 85, Issue 52
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Message-ID:
In a message dated 4/26/2011 12:08:42 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
smole...@eunet.rs writes:
Translation is not sweat of the brow. Copyright law of Germany, for
example, explicitly states that translations are copyrighted:
http://bundesrecht.juris.de/urhg/__3.html . Copyright law of Serbia,
In a message dated 4/26/2011 4:42:50 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
waihor...@yahoo.com.hk writes:
Baidu do not translate anything copy from English Wikipedia or Japanese
Wikipedia, but just keep the full content without attribution and changing
anything. There are totally about 50 articles
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Steven Walling swall...@wikimedia.orgwrote:
Hi everyone,
Just a quick heads up that Sue will be having one of her regular IRC office
hours in #wikimedia-office this Thursday, April 28th at 17:00 UTC.
Instructions about how to join etc. are on Meta.[1]
As
From a New York Times blog post about the use of the word foundation
versus the use of the word charity:
Some charities, however, have the word Foundation in their official
names. Examples of these are the Yele Haiti Foundation, the New York
Foundation for the Arts, the William J. Clinton
On 26 April 2011 20:22, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
It appears that nobody appears to actually follow this rule (including the
New York Times), but I find the nuance interesting. I imagine one would
perform better than the other during fundraising; perhaps there's hard data
on that.
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 4:22 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
From a New York Times blog post about the use of the word foundation
versus the use of the word charity:
Is the WMF only a charitable organization?
I think WMF is much more than that.
MZMcBride, 26/04/2011 21:22:
From a New York Times blog post about the use of the word foundation
versus the use of the word charity:
Something to consider is that the WMF has a global audience. In Italian,
for instance, a translation for charity doesn't even exist: all
foundations are
From a New York Times blog post about the use of the word foundation
versus the use of the word charity:
Some charities, however, have the word Foundation in their official
names. Examples of these are the Yele Haiti Foundation, the New York
Foundation for the Arts, the William J. Clinton
MZMcBride, 26/04/2011 21:22:
From a New York Times blog post about the use of the word
foundation
versus the use of the word charity:
Something to consider is that the WMF has a global audience. In Italian,
for instance, a translation for charity doesn't even exist: all
foundations are
Fred Bauder, 26/04/2011 21:08:
MZMcBride, 26/04/2011 21:22:
From a New York Times blog post about the use of the word
foundation
versus the use of the word charity:
Something to consider is that the WMF has a global audience. In Italian,
for instance, a translation for charity doesn't even
As of a Chinese Wikipedian, I can give you details:
- Baidu Copy articles from Chinese, English and Japanese Wikipedia
- Baidu copy 1680 articles in total of these three Wikipedia
- Baidu copy 1636 articles from Chinese Wikipedia, including 74 FA, 44 GA, 126
DYK and 1397 normal articles, while 10
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 3:05 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
Foundation is not a legal term
Private foundation is one, though, and it is one that is contrasted
with public charity.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_0509000-.html
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 3:05 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
wrote:
Foundation is not a legal term
Private foundation is one, though, and it is one that is contrasted
with public charity.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_0509000-.html
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 10:50 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 3:05 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
wrote:
Foundation is not a legal term
Private foundation is one, though, and it is one that is contrasted
with public charity.
19 matches
Mail list logo
