On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 5:23 AM, Andreas Kolbe <jayen...@gmail.com> wrote: > > To the extent that Wikidata draws on Wikipedia, its CC0 license would > appear to be a gross violation of Wikipedia's share-alike license > requirement. >
It's essential to also consider whether the factual information derived from Wikipedia (or any other copyrighted source) is subject to copyright. For instance, a biography might contain facts like "born in year" and "born in place" and "elected to XYZ position". I don't think facts like those are copyrightable in any jurisdiction. Perhaps there are copyrightable elements from Wikipedia that are brought into Wikidata, but I don't know offhand what they might be. The generation of data always has a social context. Knowing where data come > from is a good thing. Knowing where data comes from is a good thing, yes; but "copyright holder" and "intellectual source" are not identical concepts. If the purpose is to preserve the integrity of a line of reasoning, copyright law is probably not a very good tool for that purpose. A related question was recently asked on the web site Quora; here's my answer for why CC0 is generally preferable for data sets. (I may update it with some of the points brought up here.) https://www.quora.com/Should-open-data-be-publised-with-CC0-instead-of-CC-BY -Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]] _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
