Forum:Creative Commons
As you know, our content is licensed on a CC-by-SA license. This means that others can use our content as long as they (A) give us credit, and (B) do not use it for a commercial purpose.
So what about if someone wants to bring an article here from a site with a similar license? Do they then have to give credit to the original site if they posted it there first? Or can the author post their work at both sites without mentioning the other site?
Several authors here have posted their work both here and at the fork. I was chatting on IRC today with someone who was considering copying an article from the fork here, but was concerned that he would have to give credit to the fork because he posted the entire article there first, and they have a similar license on their work. My opinion is that giving credit to the fork for the original post would not be a violation of Wikia's terms of use, because it would not be a direct link to the fork, nor would giving credit actually be advertising the fork, if it was done in a neutral way (neither praising nor putting down the other site). The question is, how could we go about this, perhaps a template on the talk page of the article? Several of us, including myself have constructed articles on both sites at the same time or copied over articles, so I think this is something we need to address. -- Simsilikesims(♀GUN) Talk here. 22:59, May 22, 2013 (UTC)
- I would say they wouldn't have to give credit to the other site - or indeed, any other site - just as long it is their work and not something just lifted off Cracked for example. Not sure about adding a template - the only one we have is the sporked one that goes back as a reference to Wikipedia. I am willing to see where we can make an arrangement that suits all parties within reason. --
RomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 10:40, May 24, 2013 (UTC)
- Remember what PuppyOnTheRadio wrote a few months ago. If you wrote an article on another site that uses CC-by-SA, you own it. You gave the site publication rights, and random other people restricted rights, but you did not give up ownership. Given that you are a username on this website too, you are free and welcome to post your own work here and there is absolutely no need to document where else it might have appeared earlier.
- The sharing issue we discussed recently did not turn on whether an Uncyclopedian owned his work but on incompatible promises he had given a third party.
- Regarding copying material here from another site not because it is yours but simply because you find it funny, we don't want it, any more than a link to YouTube, because "we are not a catalog to funny stuff found elsewhere." If it is really so funny that it has to be here, ask the owner to register on this website and contribute his own work. Spıke Ѧ 11:37 24-May-13
- This is the principle I had been using before, copying over only my own work or changes from the fork on occasion, though usually I begin my edits to articles here, then copy them over there. I have no plans to copy over anybody else's work, and certainly not without their permission. Unlike carlb's mirror, this site is not an archive of other funny stuff, it is a place for original creations. So I take it that as long as the original author is given credit, the attribution is satisfied, thus if you worked on it and nobody else did, there is no issue with giving attribution if you are copying and pasting material from your own article. -- Simsilikesims(♀GUN) Talk here. 21:27, May 24, 2013 (UTC)
- Spike is correct. If you are copying your own work, it doesn't matter where it's from (unless you don't own the copyright for that work of course - for example if it was commissioned by a magazine). Once you paste it here, it is available for anyone to use under the CC-by-nc-sa, even if you previously posted it on your own website with a big red "C" over it.
- This is the principle I had been using before, copying over only my own work or changes from the fork on occasion, though usually I begin my edits to articles here, then copy them over there. I have no plans to copy over anybody else's work, and certainly not without their permission. Unlike carlb's mirror, this site is not an archive of other funny stuff, it is a place for original creations. So I take it that as long as the original author is given credit, the attribution is satisfied, thus if you worked on it and nobody else did, there is no issue with giving attribution if you are copying and pasting material from your own article. -- Simsilikesims(♀GUN) Talk here. 21:27, May 24, 2013 (UTC)
- If you were to import articles from the fork to this wiki (or vice versa) then including the article history is sufficient attribution. Using Special:Import/Export does that for you. This is why the fork could copy all articles from here in the initial import, including articles that the current editors on the fork hadn't written.
- If a site's articles didn't have that sort of history, you would have to attribute in a different way.
- You could not import an article from Cracked or similar, because you don't have the right to license it under the CC-by-nc-sa. So you would not only be using copyrighted work without permission, you would also be adding a license fraudulently. The license needs to be compatible with the one here for any transfer to work.