Date:         Tue, 4 May 2010 09:44:51 -0700
Reply-To:     Peter DiFalco <peter.difalco@GMAIL.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Peter DiFalco <peter.difalco@GMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Vanagon Wiki: MODS?
In-Reply-To:  <BLU0-SMTP67C04ADF43BBD970B42C5BA6F30@phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

I think that it's worth considering obtaining permission to publish and
permission to cover articles contributed under legal license, such as
Creative Commons 3.0 which specifies how others can use the material. It
might give content contributors some peace of mind knowing that their
articles cannot be packaged on CDs and resold, or even altered should you
choose that particular license. It gives me pleasure knowing that by copying
a wiki article to a private file I would be be exercising rights
specifically granted to make my life better.  There are options:
http://creativecommons.org/about/licenses

Cheers,
Peter

On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 9:29 AM, Karl Wolz <wolzphoto@q.com> wrote:

> It's been a while, but as a photographer I am pretty sensitive to copyright
> infringement.  I made the point repeatedly (against those unnamed folk who
> think that once something is on the internet that it's copyright free) that
> before articles are gathered and published, we should obtain permissions of
> authors.  I kinda recall getting shouted down on the issue, and lost
> interest.
>
> There is also the issue of liability.  Don't begin to think that there is
> none, just because someone makes a boneheaded entry and someone equally
> boneheaded follows the advice and gets killed, that the heirs won't be
> looking for someone, anyone, to sue.  That's just the way our society is.
>
> That being said, I'm all for the project.
>
> I suggest that articles be organized to mirror the layout of Bentley, BTW.
> It would certainly make finding relevant data easier.
>
> I'll help in any way I can (Photography and graphic design, for the most
> part, and I'm a pretty good proofreader.
>
> Karl Wolz
>
>
>
> |So who is this silent group of people privately claiming their words
> |were stolen? Did you examine their posts and the articles? Why weren't
> |the plagiarized articles acted upon? This could have been cleared up
> |within a day. The articles could have been taken down immediately.
> |
>