Re: [Fhsst-authors] [Fwd: Logs section]

[Peter Hutnick]

Mark Horner wrote:

> Hi Peter
>
> There is a danger that someone may unwittingly put content in the
> wikipedia which they are not entitled to.


I don't know how a person could do that unwittingly.  Possibly 
carelessly or witlessly . . .

> I believe that we should use content from the wikipedia because it is
> FDL licensed and one of our goals is to try to get people to later use
> our content just like we will use the content from the wikipedia.


I like the sound of that.

> Wikipedia is responsible for ensuring their content meets FDL
> requirements and I believe that it is certainly reasonable for us to
> use their content in the belief that it is copyrighted under FDL. They
> publicly proclaim their content is FDL


That is what they state, but they make no effort to verify ownership as 
far as I can tell.  I have posted stuff to the Wikipedia before, and 
there was absolutely nothing to stop me from posting someone else's 
material.

I guess what I am asking is how everyone feels about having to yank 
material if a rightful copyright holder steps up and requests it?  Are 
we (and by we I mean you) prepared to deal with it if it happens /after/ 
the dead-tree versions are produced?

> To be reasonable and a bit safer though, we should probably use
> wikipedia content as an initial draft for our content. Once we have
> modified to meet syllabus requirements, layout and style I think it
> will stand on its own.


I don't know what the situation is outside the US, but here it makes no 
difference.  The edited version would be a "derivative work" and subject 
to the whims of the holder of the copyrights to the original version.

-Peter