This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments or questions on this topic should be made in a new Senate Hall page rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record. Graestan(Talk) 00:12, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
While doing some Google searches, I came across this page. Clicking on "History" under "Blog" brings up a list of entries, many of which are copied directly from Wookieepedia with absolutely no attribution whatsoever and no mention of the GFDL. Here's the list:
- the history of mandalorians
- Jango Fett
- Ewoks
- Darth Maul
- darth bane
- darth bane's apprentice
- The X-Wing
- darth nihilus
- darth plaguies
- the millennium falcon
- At-st
- slave 1
Some of the other entries are copied directly from Wikipedia and the Databank, so this guy clearly has no regard for copyrights. It appears that the procedures to follow to have this taken down can be found here. I'll leave it up to the community to decide how to handle this, since I have no experience with this type of situation. —Master Jonathan(Jedi Council Chambers) 07:03, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- Wookieepedia ia s free encyclopedia. See Wookieepedia:Copyrights: '"'Wookieepedia content can be copied, modified, and redistributed.", "Wookieepedia articles therefore will remain free forever and can be used by anybody". MauserComlink 07:16, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- I propose you read up on GFDL and what it entails, Mauser. If someone wants to use our content they must give us attribution and mention that the information is released under the GFDL license. This particular instance, however, is iffy. The site is a joint project between Yahoo and StarWars.com. We essentially operate on the goodwill of Lucasfilm, so stirring up an argument with the actual copyright holders of Star Wars might not be the best idea. --Imperialles 08:25, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- I've read both GFDL and Wookieepedia:Copyrights, I just choose not to extrapolate on that subject. =) MauserComlink 08:53, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- I propose you read up on GFDL and what it entails, Mauser. If someone wants to use our content they must give us attribution and mention that the information is released under the GFDL license. This particular instance, however, is iffy. The site is a joint project between Yahoo and StarWars.com. We essentially operate on the goodwill of Lucasfilm, so stirring up an argument with the actual copyright holders of Star Wars might not be the best idea. --Imperialles 08:25, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- The same thing happened with a few Darthipedia articles a good while back, and Yahoo were extremely bureaucratic and unhelpful about it all - in the end, it wasn't worth pursuing, and I wouldn't say this is either. It's all user added content, as opposed to something a site itself has added. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 10:42, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- I think the saddest thing is that they just copy pasted the article text without proof reading it and formatting it at all. Very professional. - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 10:45, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- So are we going to just let this go, or do we want to pursue it? If we want to pursue this, I would be more than willing to write an email to them. However, from what Imp and Acky said, it sounds like it would be best to just let it die. I'd prefer to do something about it, but if the community doesn't want to, then that's fine with me. I'd like to get some more feedback to determine what we're going to do, although it seems like we'll probably just forget about it. Chack Jadson (Talk) 11:59, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- I remember something similar coming up age ago, though with regard to Lucasfilm itself. One user jumped the gun and wrote a strongly worded e-mail to them and thankfully the recipients just ignored it. The general consensus seemed to be that we are in a dubious position ourselves and that there's no point attracting undue attention to the legal aspects of this site. We're always going to remain the best :) -- —Harrar (Cut the comm chatter) 12:07, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- So are we going to just let this go, or do we want to pursue it? If we want to pursue this, I would be more than willing to write an email to them. However, from what Imp and Acky said, it sounds like it would be best to just let it die. I'd prefer to do something about it, but if the community doesn't want to, then that's fine with me. I'd like to get some more feedback to determine what we're going to do, although it seems like we'll probably just forget about it. Chack Jadson (Talk) 11:59, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- I think the saddest thing is that they just copy pasted the article text without proof reading it and formatting it at all. Very professional. - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 10:45, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- There may not need to be any need to get Yahoo or Lucasfilm involved: all of these appear to be blog entries from one person, who I suppose could be politely asked to give proper attribution. —Silly Dan (talk) 12:38, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- I would advocate for a polite notice to the user, and after that- we drop it. As annoying as it is, it doesn't seem to be an issue worth going to yahoo about. Darth Trayus (Trayus Academy) 08:01, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
- Just a friendly reminder on attribution should make them think twice about blatant copy and paste in the future, and that's it. -- Riffsyphon1024 05:45, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- There's a handy "Report abuse" link on the Yahoo pages linked above. From taking a quick look at Yahoo's policies, this seems like a very appropriate way to handle the user's abuse of copyright, as it is designed in case "...you feel your intellectual property is being infringed..." Also, "It is Yahoo!’s policy, in appropriate circumstances and at its discretion, to disable and/or terminate the accounts of users who may infringe or repeatedly infringe the copyrights or other intellectual property rights of Yahoo! and/or others." —Xwing328(Talk) 02:59, 20 June 2009 (UTC)