RIght, WMF is not the copyright holder of articles as Free Software Foundation is not of GPLed source codes.
Though WMF could give legal help for a Wikipedian to file a law suit or WMF could be an agent for the Wikipedian, WMF need to approach Baidu to discuss about attribution. I don't think Baidu has so much difficulties to do it. Cheol 2011/4/19 Thomas Dalton <[email protected]> > 2011/4/19 Dana Lutenegger <[email protected]>: > > Actually, I'm pretty sure that on paper, Chinese law forbids this kind of > > copying without attribution. The issue is whether or not it can be > enforced > > in practice. If it was strictly enforced, a lot of Baidu Baike and Hudong > > Wiki would have to be seriously retooled, so I doubt it. However, there > have > > been recent cases in which copyright infringement claims have been upheld > by > > Chinese courts, such as the infamous "Starbuck" coffee chain in Shanghai. > I > > think that our legal counsel should at least be in touch with Baidu on > this, > > and perhaps try to get them to take down the material, attribute it > > properly, or agree to the donation or apology letter ideas. > > The Starbuck case would be trademark infringement, not copyright, so > isn't a particularly useful precedent. I believe China has similar > copyright laws to the rest of the world, though (our article says they > have signed several international agreements on the subject: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property_in_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China > ). > > Keep in mind, the WMF isn't the copyright holder, so there is a limit > to what the WMF's legal counsel can do. He could have a quiet word, > though, which could help. > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
