Guild Wars Wiki talk:Copyrighted content/draft B/Archive 1

This draft is generally the Guild Wars Wiki:Official content policy updated to the new licensing terms. I've also reorganized it, reworded some stuff that I thought was misleading/wrong (fact copyright), expanded some examples, and explained {{copyvio}}, all of which I'd hope is completely non-controversial. I added some additional stuff regarding ArenaNet content (keeping it separated from GFDL content and tagging images) which might warrant a bit more consideration. --Rezyk 18:13, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

Miscellaneous Comments

1) For original content, we should probably make a distinction between original content produced by the submitter and original content produced by their friend Vinnie. Normally we assume that anyone submitting text is submitting their own content and they agree to it to be licensed pursuant to GFDL. However if the submitter is submitting original text or images from their friend Vinnie, they need (a) attribute it to him (b) indemnify that they have obtained permission from him to submit it under GFDL. This may crop up a bit if someone had images created for them by someone. I think we need to be pretty anal at being able to prove provinence for any content on the site.

2) We mention GFDL-sites but we should probably be more specific and specify GFDL 1.2 sites. Under the current terms of the license I don't think we could accept content from GFDL 1.3 sites if and when they exist. uh, we should be able to include it as long as anything later than GFDL 1.2 is more liberal than 1.2 not restrictive. I think that's always going to be true.

3) I'm wondering whether we should make a mention of Fair Use... it is possible to make use of minor inclusions from copyrighted sources under the fair use doctrine. (Guildwiki obviously made use of this even though they had no specific agreement with Anet) Vladtheemailer 18:35, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

I added a bit to try to address (1). Vinnie is technically a compatible GFDL source in this case, no? Issues like future GFDL and fair use should be discussed, but I don't want to work them into this particular proposal as they should take some time to digest properly and I'm looking to fix up the current outdated policy sooner. If no glaring issues are pointed out, I'll probably officially propose this soon. --Rezyk 19:31, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

technically Vinnie could be a compatible GFDL source, I was just making a point that while a lot of people are usually diligent about considering copyright from online sources they don't often consider that stuff given to them by their friends are still copyrighted. Vladtheemailer

Oh...another point is, you've mentioned NCSoft I'm assuming the agreement was with Arenanet(albeit a NCSoft company) for Arenanet content. i.e. I don't think its likely that (say) City of Heroes material should be acceptable. (We had someone upload some Starcraft copyright material earier I believe so I guess its possible that someone'd try.) VladTheEmailer 20:38, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

Hmm..good point. I changed 2 things to try to address this:

1. Changed "Allowed content sources" to "Compatible content sources", so we're only concered about compatibility with the license here. Lots of things are compatible with the license but not necessarily allowed on the wiki, for other reasons. =)
2. Changed "Content where the copyright [...]" to "Guild Wars content where the copyright [...]". I don't think we should cut out the mention of NCsoft entirely since it is in the offical licensing terms. Note that this doesn't forbid non-Guild Wars content but leaves it still up in the air.

--Rezyk 20:55, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

It seems like this policy should tie up with the Guild_Wars_Wiki:Copyrights especially as far as mentioning specifics of tagging the text that LordBiro mentions in Guild_Wars_Wiki_talk:Copyrights#Text. It just seems this policy and that one are trying to say pretty much the same thing. VladTheEmailer 22:47, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

I think the stuff in Guild_Wars_Wiki_talk:Copyrights#Text is going to need much more discussion. To make things simpler on this proposal, I took out my additions about tagging images and separating non-GFDL content. (I'm strongly for them and don't know if anyone even opposes, but am putting them off for a future change proposal.) --Rezyk 01:05, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

Official proposal

I'll make this an official policy change proposal now. Please comment on Guild Wars Wiki talk:Official content#Proposed update, hopefully noncontroversial instead of here during the proposal process. --Rezyk 01:08, 22 March 2007 (EDT)