User talk:Etaylorneaq
|
Copyright issue: Phoenix Islands Protected Area
[edit]Hello. I appreciate your interest in improving this article, but unfortunately we are not able to accept content copied from other sources unless we are able to verify that they are public domain or compatibly licensed. In this case, the website is marked "© 2007-2012 Phoenix Islands Protected Area. All Rights Reserved." In order for us to use material from that website, we either need to receive an email from a designated agent of the Phoenix Islands Protected Area or to be given a link to where on that website a compatible license has been published.
Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials and Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries for more information. If you have any questions about the process for verifying license, please feel free to let me know, either by leaving a note at my talk page (User talk:Moonriddengirl) or by leaving your question here with the following code: {{ping|Moonriddengirl}}. I will be happy to try to assist you.
Thank you. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:56, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you for your note. As you are authorized to release content, please follow the directions at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for placing your license on the website or email the release form you find at Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries to the address on that page. If you choose to do the release on your website, please let me know, with a link where it can be found, and I will be happy to help document it for our records. If you do the email release, it will be handled by whoever receives that email. Generally these are processed within a week or two, but I can help speed that if you let me know when the email has been sent.
- While we can of course accept content that is published on your website, I'm afraid that for us to accept content that has been published by another organization, we need confirmation from that organization that you are authorized to release it. They can do this through email as long as they identify the specific publication and the article in which the content appears. The form at Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries works for this as well.
- The message with multiple websites involved was not in regards to the content you just added. I am assuming all of the contents you added were taken from your website, although I did not check.
- For one example, this text was copied from official publications of UNESCO:
The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage Convention aims to promote cooperation among nations to protect heritage around the world that is of such outstanding universal value that its conservation is important for current and future generations. It is intended that, unlike the seven wonders of the ancient world, properties on the World Heritage List will be conserved for all time.
- We can see one point of publication here: [1]. UNESCO's content is fully reserved. The Commonwealth of Australia is publishing this under their own copyright. Even though I suspect they may be mistaken in that assertion - I believe UNESCO probably authored that text - it really doesn't matter for our purposes. The United Nations reserves rights on their material as well.
- Other content was taken from publications like this paper by Pierce et al.. We would need verification from the authors that they have authorized your organization to license this content.
- I realize that these rules may seem excessive, and I do apologize for the complication. As one of the ten most accessed websites in the world, Wikipedia is not only read by but copied by many. Part of our mission is to make educational content available to everyone in the world, at no cost. For this reason, we license the text on our website for modification and reuse, even commercially, so long as the terms of our license are met (in brief, they require attribution of the content and persistence of the license - somebody cannot take our content and re-release it under full copyright reservation or under a more liberal license). If not for this licensing scheme, it would probably be a much simpler matter for people to place content here, knowing that here is where it would stay. But when you release content to Wikipedia, you are essentially releasing it to the world. I think this is a good idea - it's one of our core values - but we think copyright owners should be fully informed of what they're doing, and for our own protection we do need them to acknowledge that they are. :)
- If specific content can't be released (such as the UNESCO description or material from Pierce's paper), the information can certainly be summarized or explained in original language in the article. It just can't be copied or too closely paraphrased to the original. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:30, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
Etaylorneaq, you are invited to the Teahouse
[edit]
|
Hi Etaylorneaq! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. |