Talk:Korean Buddhism: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
------------- |
------------- |
||
It's not, if it's a rollback (which it is now), but someone had just gone to my site and copied the present article as is, which would not have been kosher. [[User:Acmuller]] |
|||
Revision as of 09:52, 2 October 2004
Template:Korean requires
|hangul= parameter.
Blanking
Acmuller, who had originally created this text (which he thereby licensed under the GFDL) now wants this article to be removed. He replaced the article text on September 30, 2004 by the following:
- To Wikipedia Editors:
- I have removed this entire article, as it is in copyright violation. I am the author of the original article, which is located at
- I have removed it in the past, and it was returned. Please do not return it. If someone would like to make a link to that article, fine, but do not roll back to this page.
- Charles Muller (acmuller@gol.com)
I'd just like to point out that since he licensed his own text under the GFDL, our use of it here on Wikipedia is quite legal, not infringing his copyright, and AFAIK he has no way of revoking that GFDL license.
I have thus reinstantiated the text. Lupo 11:20, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
The earliest version of the external web page at the www.archive.org is from February 15, 2004: http://web.archive.org/web/20040215174502/http://www.hm.tyg.jp/~acmuller/kor-bud/korbud-overview.html and has a cc-by-nc-sa (V1.0) license. Lupo 11:20, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- The text in our article has been written originally on August 15 and August 19, 2003, i.e. about 6 months before the archiving at www.archive.org took place. Acmuller has contacted Jimbo about this. See also my talk page. Lupo 12:34, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I am an extensive contributor to Wikipedia, including over 200 entries.
A while back, I contributed this lengthy article on Korean Buddhism, but after finding it being copied around the Web without attribution, I decided I was not happy about this, and took the article down (but leaving a link to the original site). The edits done during the interim added nothing to the content, consisting only of the chopping of long paragraphs into little one.
The Wikipedia editors tell me that I have lost my rights to this material by originally posting it under the GFPL. If this is so, it is a sad case, and certainly does not seem reflective of the spirit of cooperation we would expect to see from Wikipedia. Regardless of the legalities of the matter, it seems that out of common decency, as the author of the total piece, I should have the right to decide I don't want it on Wikipedia. This is a special case, and I have not, and do not intend to repeat it with any of the other hundreds of pieces I have contributed.
In any case, it was a bad idea just to re-paste the article from the original site (without the author's permission), because this is legally no longer a document that was originally contained and edited on the Wikipedia site, but an article that was demonstrably copied directly from a copyrighted work. My suggestion is to remove it immediately, to avoid legal problems. (The author)
- You had better explain this in more detail. Acmuller uploaded his own text, and has thus re-licensed it under the GFDL. So cut the crap with "copyright violations". This is not a copyright violation at all. Lupo 09:35, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)
It's not, if it's a rollback (which it is now), but someone had just gone to my site and copied the present article as is, which would not have been kosher. User:Acmuller