FANDOM


(The Dakara decision)
(The Dakara decision)
Line 216: Line 216:
 
::::I agree. We have just used the structure as a template, and that is OK. We shouldn't use any links or text on the main page that we haven't thought of using ourselves, but the structure gathered from MA is good, and we should keep that. [[User:Pjotr'k|Peter R]] 19:45, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 
::::I agree. We have just used the structure as a template, and that is OK. We shouldn't use any links or text on the main page that we haven't thought of using ourselves, but the structure gathered from MA is good, and we should keep that. [[User:Pjotr'k|Peter R]] 19:45, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)
   
:::::Is this an "official" policy now, are we going to continue the copyrights project to get rid of all wikipedia material (which will take a while), or is it going to be one of those, "get rid of it if you find it but don't go looking for it" policies?--[[User:GingerM|GingerM]] 20:06, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)
+
:::::Is this an "official" policy now, are we going to continue the copyrights project to get rid of all wikipedia material (which will take a while), or is it going to be one of those, "get rid of it if you find it but don't go looking for it" policies? BTW: The whole copyright inringement category has been finished now, the only articles in it are the two templates and [[Dakara]] (which we're discussing now). It musn't have updated at your end yet. :). Also copying from wikipedia isn't copyright infringement as it's been released under the GNU Free Documentation License, but usually frowned upon in most wikis anyway --[[User:GingerM|GingerM]] 20:06, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:10, December 12, 2005

This page is part of the Community Portal on this wiki, but this article discusses only the issues on copyright, copyright infringement and fair use, with relating topics.

Copyrights?

I'm starting to see more and more articles that are copies from the Gateworld's Omnipedia (Martouf, Za'tarc, Beliskner, to name a few). It's my understanding that this wiki should be unique and not a copy from something else. Besides Gateworld has a very clear guideline: This material may not be reprinted without written consent from GateWorld.

What are we going to do with those articles? Rewrite, delete, or just blank them?

If we have consent to copy the omnipedia then forget that I've said anything, but I can hardly imagine that. --Patricia 16:24, 30 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I have seen quite a few of those as well. My meaning is that we have to rewrite those. We must fill with more material that is known. Material can we get elsewhere as well, for example from the episodes transcripts that are to be found on some places on the Internet. I suggest that you make a template called Template:rewrite with a category tied to that template called "Category:Rewrite"or something like that, and then we can mark every page we find with {{rewrite}}. With that possibility, we can make it to a project to find and rewrite every page that is in fact stolen. What do you think? Peter R 21:03, 30 Oct 2005 (UTC)
I think it's a good idea. This way we don't have to throw away articles, but we can try to rewrite/improve them. When I get back from work I'll create the template and category. I'll put the category in the SGCommand:Projects page. After that I'll start searching this wiki for stolen articles. --Patricia 09:35, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)
Great! Thanks for your efforts. You and the others that has come here during the last week are really improving things around here. I'm quite busy at the swedish Memory Alpha, because I'm the only one working there, so I do appreciate everything you are doing! Peter R 14:24, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC) (who's been around here a few months)
Well I'm done. I named the template and the category a little different. I made a Template:Copyright infringement and a Category:Copyright infringement. I've put the category on the projects page. I would appreciate it if you would read them through for me, and correct any mistakes that I've made.
I know what it's like to work on MA all by yourself. I've done that for a long time on the Dutch version. Thank god Eelco came along and lend me a hand. But know we're turning our attention to Stargate Command. Believe me, even Star Trek gets boring after a while. Good luck with the Swedish version though. I noticed that you already have 782 articles there. Good work! --Patricia 19:19, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)


It looks quite good, I must say. A note: You say on the page Category:Copyright infringement that "The next step is to place the article in this category by adding: [[Category:Copyright infringement]]" That would not be necessary, since you already noted that category within the template {{Copyright infringement}}. I therefore removed that sentence. Otherwise, very good looking, I must say! Thanks for the MA boost! I need that! Peter R 21:25, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)
Every (Yes every!) article ever created by Knightmare has been stolen. Most of them are from Gateworld, others come from answers.com, wiki, etc. Just look at[[1]. I've started at the bottom of his list and I've only gotten to 23 jun 2005 02:57 (hist) (wijz) NID so far. There are still about 500 edits I haven't looked through... We already have 57 articles in the Category:Copyright infringement.
Which idiot was stupid enough to make this guy an administrator? I really can't believe this! Someone really wasn't paying attention. I can imagine that one article gets unnoticed, but all of them? He kept making new articles in one row, minute after minute he made a new article. Copy and paste perhaps??!!
I really liked working on this wiki, but I've totally lost interest now. I hope you guys can fix up what he has done in the past year (!). Maybe you guys will see me again in the future, maybe not... I don't know yet.
To all of you who have worked on Stargate Command with your best efforts (Peter, GingerM, ..., I wish you good luck in the future.
Greetings,
--Patricia 21:37, 1 Nov 2005 (UTC)
Please, stay! I'm begging you! I will start to fix the copyright infringement pages very soon, and together we will fix this quickly. Please, anything you can contribute in new articles would be greatly accepted and gladly embraced. So please, don't walk away! Peter R 07:27, 2 Nov 2005 (UTC)
How can I leave after such an uplifting response? :) Even before I read your response I decided to clean this wiki up. I liked working on this wiki and wanted to contribute in the future. The truth is that I can't be angry for more then a few hours. Even if it turns out that there are about 200 articles stolen (my rough estimate since I'm not even halfway with Knightmare's contributions), I'll try to make this wiki as succesful as Memory Alpha English is. Offcourse any help with this is very much appreciated.
Even Knightmare is welcome if he wants to make right what he has done wrong. But I don't want him to be an administrator anymore. We're setting the wrong example by having an administrator that in fact is a thief. I hope someone will take the administrator rights away from him.
I wanted to finish going through his contributions list tonight. If anyone else finds copyright infringement articles in the meantime just slap the template on that page. Then we'll have an idea how much work there is for us.
--Patricia 09:57, 2 Nov 2005 (UTC)

I will deal with him next Monday SGCommand

Why wait? This needs to be solved rather quickly, because bad mood on the wiki tends to be very bad for the community as a whole. I have made an entry at his talk page, pointing him here. I'm not comfortable with blocking him at this point, but that could be a way out. But, of course, he can't participate in this discussion either in that case. No, blocking him is not a solution, talking is! Peter R 10:53, 2 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Rewriting copyright infringement articles

I agree that blocking him is not the way it should be, let him explain what has happened and eventually take actions after that. By the way, what should we do with the copyrighted articles? Just rewriting articles is that another way of just putting the sentences or some words in another order or just start new from scrap and actually deleting the entire article? --TalShiar 12:18, 2 Nov 2005 (UTC)

To rewrite means in my head that the text must be totally changed. Of course, we do keep a word here and there, but it must be the words you should have used yourselves. I wouldn't say crappy, for instance, but maybe I instead would write it in my own english vocabulary. In that case, it gets personalized and maybe even better. After that is said, I must also always think of getting information från other places. As I said above, I think that the episode transcripts available around the net, is a good source in actually getting exactly what happened in the episode. Example: In the article called Sodan I first looked at the transcripts and found the exact words used about the Sodan's history. I used these words and transplanted them into the article. Sometimes I had to rewrite, but sometimes I used the text right off. In that case, the episode transcripts is exactly as the words said in the episode, so I could have got that information directly from the episode instead. Therefore, I firmly believe that it is OK just to take the information in episode transcripts right off. In other cases it is not. Peter R 12:53, 2 Nov 2005 (UTC)
I see now that also some of my created articles has been noted in the "refrigerator" category (I call it that, because this infredg.., enfrih..., that word you know - it is too difficult to write). I will make some huge efforts in fixing this. A note to us all: When we do rewrite - try to find episode sources! See a previous discussion here above. Peter R 18:36, 2 Nov 2005 (UTC)

in defense...

In defense of Knightmare, he participated and added content when there weren't many people here, and it was slow and heavy going. As most of you probably know, I feel strongly about respecting copyrights and acknowledging where we are building on other's work. However, I believe that many of Knightmare's earlier contributions were original writing. And when asked, he went and got permission from one of the sites where he got many of the images we use.
To resolve this, the articles that are copyright infringements should be completely rewritten (in my opinion). Just paraphrasing (rearranging the words, but taking the ideas) is still plagerism. Since we watch the show, we can summarize the episodes in our own words. We can find out information about the actors from the fan sites, press releases and other sources, put that information in our own words and include references (for example links to those fan sites).
Not only is this the right thing to do legally and morally, but it will make the wiki better. If we are just a copy of other sites, why bother?
(Personally, I'd like to see more opinions here. Unlike the Wikipedia, we do not have to aim for npov (neutral point of view). So, we could have votes for favorite episodes, characters...)
I quit being as active earlier this summer mostly because I was so busy, but also because I was tired of feeling like the copyright police. So, I appreciate the fact that others are also concerned about this issue. I hope we can clean-up the site, but let's not attack the people who unintentionally violate copyright. We need a few good articles about what is and is not acceptable, and we need to consistently point people to them.
Thanks for reading. --CocoaZen 05:19, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC)

I hope I haven't been too hard. I also believe that Knigtmare's help has been invaluable to this wiki, and we wouldn't be where we are today if it wasn't for him. The fault on the copyright articles lies as well on me and on the other archivists, because we haven't seen or stopped something that went wrong. If I didn't get a note from someone saying that I should change something, I would probably not change... How could I? Peter R 05:54, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC)
I'm sorry to say this but this kind of weak response is exactly the reason why we now have 185 articles that are copyrighted. You say that Knightmare's first writings were original writings. You are wrong about this because the very first pages he created are now in our copyright category. Perhaps there are 20 articles that he has written himself. Most of which are short stub articles.
Since you are the one that made him an administrator I understand that you want to defend him. Especially since you are the one that claims to be so considerated about copyrights. You let him upload copryrighted articles and rewarded him by making him an administrator. Peter is right on this: How could he change?
There was one other thing that I didn't agree with in your defense. You say that he did this unintentionally. I find this very hard to believe. Every thief knows when he is stealing something. So does he.
I really can't say that I find Knightmare's work invaluable to this wiki. How do you think people will respond when they come here for the first time? Most of the articles they will be looking for will have a tag with copyright infringement. Articles like Teal'c, Elizabeth Weir and John Sheppard are high priority because most people would want to read those.
Although I don't want to be the bitch around here, you can count on it that I never, I say never, will thank Knightmare for the work he has done here. I'm used to high standards on Wiki because of my previous work on Memory Alpha. I understand that we need to work together on fixing this problem (CocoaZen, Peter, GingerM, TalShiar, ..). I hope everything will be rather quickly resolved. After that we can start looking into the future and improve Stargate Command greatly.
--Patricia 09:56, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC)
I understand your onjections, Patricia, and I will not force you to apologize. However, now is the time to go forward, especially when we have so much work at our hands, so I have fixed the Elizabeth Weir article. I suggest that we all, when we find any information on any article, puts that in the respective article and that we continue to expand our knowledge. We don't have to write the whole article on the spot, it's better that we take it bit by bit. I suggest that we remove everything that we know are copyrighted, when we make it to those articles. I don't suggest that we go through them all in a row and remove the text, but that we take it article by article. There are now 185 articles. I suggest that our goal is to totally rewrite 35 of those within two weeks. Are we up to the challenge? Read more at the project's page where we can keep on updating our progress. Peter R 11:09, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Using screencaps on Stargate Command

On my talkpage CocoaZen raised the doubt if you could use screencaps on Stargate Command in the same manner as for example on Memory Alpha. I never really looked at this aspect because MA uses fair use guideline. I always assumed that every wiki operates on the same guideline. But we don't have this guideline set in place yet on SGC.

The fair use guideline means that you can use screencaps as long as you add the following to the image description (the following is taken from Memory Alpha):

  • credit for the original author of the image or other media file (if the file is a fan-created work) including a link where the original author may be contacted, or
  • the original source of the image or other media file (if the file is derived from an official Star Trek work, e.g. screenshots and sound bytes).

You must also include information about:

  • whether the file is uploaded to Memory Alpha with express permission of the author, or under fair use rules, and
  • the source of the file, being a specific episode, movie, book, other official work, a website, or any other medium.

For example: Mount Rushmore National Memorial in 2287. (Star Trek V: The Final Frontier, deleted scene)

The copyright of this image belongs to Paramount Pictures. Its use is contended to be consistent with fair use rules under United States copyright law. See Copyrights.

(source:http://www.memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Memory_Alpha:Copyrights)

You can read more info on the wikipage http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use


If we want to uphold our high standards on copyright infringements we should make sure that every image description has included the above.

I've gone through some other wiki's and most of them use the same standard. I've used Memory Alpha's copyright template as a start. For Stargate Command the following template could apply:

Description of image. (Screencap, Image, ... from ...:"Episode")

The copyright of this image belongs to MGM Television Entertainment. Its use is contended to be consistent with fair use rules under United States copyright law. See Copyrights.

I would like to hear your opinions about this. --Patricia 10:11, 3 Nov 2005 (UTC)

I think the template is a good design, it gives people the information they need on the copyrights and that we should start using screenshots under the Fair Use rules so we won't be questioned on our copyright status. As long as the template is clear and easy to read, we've got no problem.--GingerM 15:31, 3 Nov 2005 (UTC)
Patricia - I'm aware of the claim that Memory Alpha makes about this being "fair use". I'm also aware that there is some question about this really falls under "fair use". So far I haven't been able to find any one (or any legal site or citation) who is really familiar with copyright or intellectual property laws and who says whether this is or is not legal. The uninformed opinion of a bunch of Wikizens (including me) doesn't settle the matter either way.  :-( I've seen the same thing claimed for copying entire text articles, and as you noted above, that really isn't legit.
Copying for entertainment purposes does not fall under "fair use." For example, sampling from music recordings is not fair use. So, is "sampling" from a video? Wikicities are not primarily educational or non-profit (I think). See the checklist that the Wikicities article refers to for some other criteria to determine whether something is fair use.
I think it's a good idea and would make sense to have templates regarding the rules under which we are posting things. If we can find something from a legal expert saying that the screen caps fall under some rule that makes them legal, we would still need to acknowledge the copyright owners.
I like having pictures on the site, but I would like them to be legal and to acknowledge the work of the people who created the show. (I think we're doing a pretty good job of acknowledging that work, and I thank you for helping make sure that we do this.) I would be very happy, if someone could point me to an expert opinion or legal ruling that says screen caps are ok (even if it is is by a different method than "fair use").
Sorry if I sound like a broken record about this, but I keep seeing people using others' work without fair acknowledgement or an understanding of intellectual property rights. Unfortunately, plagerism and related activities are so common on the Web that many people think that makes it ok. --CocoaZen 04:45, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC)
In Sweden, we don't have this "fair use" but I've studied it at some some time. I must say, that I am not an expert, just interested... I believe that MA uses the "fair use" contingencies in a correct way. Paramount (and in our case, MGM) is very interested in that people gets to know their show, so they will benefit for it, when we are showing their pictures. However, if we do a lousy job here (and I don't think we do that, absolutely no one here!) and for example not showing where the pictures are from, in that case we are not using the "fair use" rules as they are meant. Fair use, as I understand it, can be used if you actually are promoting the picture in a good way, and at the same time publically acknowledging who is the owner of the picture. Peter R 05:50, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC)


Knightmare Response

Yes, While many of the articles that I posted were from gateworld and others. I was adding them as filler until we had a chance to write our own versions. With me being gone (and still gone) with my military unit I have not had the chance to start to go through the articles I posted and re-write them for our use. It is a Sad fact that my service is going on so long but that must come first before any project that I place myself into. Also as many of you know this is a wiki page which means that anyone who would like to take the ambition and time may go through and re-write it. By the way little nasty thoughts about me all I have to say is .... I DON'T CARE .... also like the boss man said many of the articles that I wrote when I had the time are origanal writtings. Patrica if you have a problem please feel free to contact me and I will respond when i get the chance. Pete thanks for you defence in my absence and when I return from serving my country I will be more than happy to oversee the re-write project, and would thank anyone whould would like to contribute to the project in my absence. I also think copyright infringment is distasteful but as I said it was intended as filler until we had time. Now you have my point of view and please feel free to contact me. If it is not enough let me know and remove me from the admin list I have no problem with not staying where I am wanted.
User:Knightmare 17:40, 5 Nov 2005 (UTC)

First of all thanks for your response. I appreciate it that you admit that you've taken articles from Gateworld and other sites. I still don't like the fact that you felt the need to steal texts from other sites and place them here. You must have known that your service was going to take a while. If not, you could have just posted a message on every page you created to let us now that others need to rewrite them. And if you think copyright infringment is distasteful you could have placed the following text on the bottom: This article was originallyposted on Gateworld.
This sentence is just ridiculous: also like the boss man said many of the articles that I wrote when I had the time are origanal writtings. You know this is cr*p! There are about 20 articles that you have written yourself.
As you might have noticed I'm not as easily persuaded by a: I was trying to do the right thing- speech. I still vote for removing you from the admin list. You've made a serious mistake by uploading almost 190 articles that are copyrighted. We would be setting the wrong example if you remain administrator.
--Patricia 22:33, 6 Nov 2005 (UTC)
@Knightmare, can you please tell me what is the use of "filler" material if you have to rewrite it later? I better prefer a wiki with a few articles than a wiki with a lot of articles that need to be rewritten later. By the way, removing you from the adminlist doesn't have to mean that you have to quit contributing to this wiki. If you have a look on the Dutch Memory Alpha, then you can see that a lot of major/important articles are still missing, wich is better than copying them just right of another site, but that's my opinion. This is the last I will say about this, from now on I will focus myself on the episode articles wich need a lot of info to be added. --TalShiar 23:24, 6 Nov 2005 (UTC)
Knightmare, if you were just copying the articles and using them as "fillers", don't you think you could have at least told/asked one of the admins if they thought it was a good idea, instead of just going ahead and stealing almost 190 copyrighted articles from Gateworld?
--GingerM 08:51, 7 Nov 2005 (UTC)
GingerM - Knightmare is an administrator and at the time he copied most of those articles, there weren't other active participants to ask or to notice.
I granted administrative rights to Knightmare because he was doing so much of the work. And, early on his articles were original, and he helped fix problems that others caused regarding copyright and vandalism.
At the time Knightmare was one of the few people doing any work on this wiki. It's hard when there is no one around to help. I wish I had known that his articles were copied early on, so I could have said something then, but I didn't. And no one else did either. Unfortunately this allowed what should have been a minor problem, if caught early, to grow.
Ok, so it's done. I don't think the articles should have been copied, and I am grateful that people noticed and are working are repairs.
Knightmare did not continue to post copied articles after it became clear that this is unacceptable. Being in the military, he probably didn't have a choice about when he was deployed, so he may not have the time to repair things himself.
I don't think there's a need to change his rights to this wiki unless there is a further problem.
I propose that we move on. Knightmare keeps his administrative rights, unless he continues to copy copyrighted work. And we all keep working at making this one of the best Wikicities we've ever participated in. For me, part of that is a welcoming atmostphere. We all make mistakes, and I hope we're all willing to do our best to correct them.
--CocoaZen 00:56, 8 Nov 2005 (UTC)
Okay, let me be blunt. You are an idiot, CocoaZen! You fix all the stuff around here yourself! When your buddy Knightmare comes along you can keep on working to destroy this wiki even further. If you would have taken the time to take one look in his contributions list you would have known that he was lying about his original articles. Allowing him to be an administrator even one day longer is unacceptable.
I hope you realise that by losing me on this wiki, you are also losing one other member...That's what you get when two people that are engaged to get married work on the same wiki...
Peter, GingerM: I wish you the best. Goodbye.
--Patricia 07:01, 8 Nov 2005 (UTC)

OK, I'm not sure if this discussion is over, so here's my opinion. The facts are:

  1. Knightmare submitted copyrighted work. That's undisputed. Also Cocoazen, all his edits were copyrighted, no original work went into it.

According to CocoaZen, there were hardly any users submitting work at the beggining, so hardly anybody to notice or contact about it. Know its been 'discovered' there's an uproar about it. Well for one there was you CocoaZen. He could have asked you f he should have continued instead of copying more than 100 articles.

In my opinion, copying articles and using them as "filler until we had a chance to write our own versions" is a lot of extra work and hassle compared to writing them ourselves. Also, when were the other users going to be told, how long would you wait before you thought we had time to write the articles ourselves. Also comments like "By the way little nasty thoughts about me all I have to say is .... I DON'T CARE ...." don't help to further the discussion. There were no nasty comments said, just people stating their opinions. Also this statement isn't true: "like the boss man said many of the articles that I wrote when I had the time are origanal writtings.", so lying in a discussion doesn't help either.

This comment seems like a joke to me "I also think copyright infringment is distasteful", but I'm glad you came back and discussed you're POV, some people would have left without a word. I agree with TalShiar's comments entirely.

In brief, I think Knightmare should have his administrative rights removed, but be welcomed back into the wiki and then we should move on. It would be setting a bad example if we had an admin who used a lot of copyrighted work.

There you go, you've heard my opinion now.--GingerM 17:04, 14 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Response to GingerM

GingerM -
I am "listening". And I know this conversation has been long, so it's hard to follow. So, please excuse me for repeating a few points.
  • I can't take away administrative priviledges. Knightmare has been willing to give up those rights, but it takes more than a fellow-admin to remove them. I have already referred this dispute the the Wikicities leaders for resolution.
  • I am not the founder, owner or ruler of this wiki. I have opinions and am willing to hear others' opinions and do what is jointly decided -- even when I may not agree.
  • There was some name calling. In my opinion, that's not the way to resolve these things. I'm glad if you missed it, because I don't think that sets the right "flavor" for a Wikicity.
  • Because of changes in my life (including weeks of travel and a job change) I was not around to consulted for several months this summer. Even if I had been here, I don't check other Stargate sites very much, so I probably would have assumed that this writing was original.
  • I am helping out with this wiki because for awhile its founder was not active, and it was in danger of being shut down. I like the show, but I'm not a fanatic. I was trying to help as I do with several other relatively new wikicities. Because I've been helpful, I've been granted admin rights -- sometimes when I didn't even ask for them. This is the third round (the first 2 were with other people) where I've had to let someone know that what they were doing was a copyright violation, and if that's all I'm going to be doing in this wikicity, I'm not sure I care to participate any longer. Would you like to be in charge of policing the copyright violations? (I'm serious. I'd be happy to have you be an admin here, GingerM, even if you don't want to be in charge of copyright policing.)
  • Knightmare did contribute some original work initially. Not all of it was copied. Yes, he copied considerable amounts. And, as I have stated more than once, I do not approve of coping and am strongly against copyright violations. However, I do think that everyone deserves a warning and an explanation. Knightmare stopped the copying with the first warning. Furthermore, he's already stated that he will help with the clean-up.
While everyone has a right to voice their opinion here, I'd much rather just wait for the Wikicities' determination of what we should do. And in the meantime, move on trying to make this Stargate Wikicity a worthwhile place to visit and participate.
--CocoaZen 18:20, 14 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration?

Because this is a legal issue that affects Wikicities and because I don't even know how to remove administrative rights without going to the main Wikicity operators, I already sent Angela a message asking for guidance on this. She replied that Terry Foote will be looking into it. We can still vote on what we recommend, but it's a Wikicities decision in the end. --CocoaZen 22:45, 10 Nov 2005 (UTC)

OK, great. I'm looking forward to hearing from Foote. Is he a lawyer, or something? Peter R 09:37, 11 Nov 2005 (UTC)
I don't know his profession. He works for Wikicities on advertising and promotion. (See wikicities:Report a problem.) --CocoaZen 05:25, 12 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Clean-up

I recommend that all text that is known to be in copyright violation be removed immediately, not just labelled. And, as I've said, I'm still not sure about the status of many of the screenshots which have been uploaded. Since I don't know that they are in copyright violation, I'll just put an alert on them for now. --CocoaZen 22:45, 10 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Wait on the pictures, I say. If someone (MGM) doesn't like that we are using their pictures, they have to first warn us. If that warning comes, we can remove them quickly. In other case, I think it's better we wait for Foote. Peter R 09:39, 11 Nov 2005 (UTC)
Copyright infringement is against the law. (And morally, taking something you didn't create or get permission to use, is bad.) MGM or someone who thinks we are violating their copyright can sue. They do not have to warn us. And, if the courts agree, the people who violated copyright and the organizations that supported it can be fined. I'd rather not have that happen to anyone here.
I think it's likely they are a copyright violation, but I do not know, so until we get an answer from someone who knows, I will wait.
The appropriate templates, like you and I are creating, will make them easier to clean up, if that becomes necessary. --CocoaZen 05:25, 12 Nov 2005 (UTC)
Oki doki! Peter R 10:11, 12 Nov 2005 (UTC)

DoNotCopy Template

I've created a "Do Not Copy" template for use in a few different ways. Since we've now had multiple problems with users who have copied massive amounts of information from other sites, I propose that we post this template on the main page (temporarily) and then after we've got things cleaned-up and have more original content, we can add it to user's pages, when they seem to be copying a lot of material. Even if it's legal material, I don't think we shoud be just a copy of other sites. I'd like to see original writing, commentaries, opinions, etc. If we're just going to be a copy, I'd rather go to the original.

Proposed template: This wiki would like to add original contents to the Stargate universe, not just copy it, so we ask that participants avoid copying material to this Wikia. Other good sites can be added to the reference sections of appropriate articles.

If the only way to get something is to copy it, make sure you have permission first. (See copyrights.)

Opinions?
--CocoaZen 00:14, 11 Nov 2005 (UTC)

It looks good. The red frame is very distinct, which is so needed. Please, do so! Peter R 09:35, 11 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Permission to use images

I've made Template:ImagesChevron to be added on the images used from the Chevron 26 site, the pictures that we have permission for. Together with the Template:Image that is used for screencaps (for now), this template's aim is to clarify with what rights we've used the images. Peter R 10:19, 11 Nov 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure if we are allowed to use pictures from rdanderson.com. On their page, they say "All image copyrights are held by Kawoosh! Productions Inc., Stargate Productions Limited Partnership, MGM Global Television Inc., Showtime Networks Inc., and Sci Fi/USA Networks, Inc." I don't know, however, if the glyphs are their own work. I can't seem to find a contact address on their site, does anyone have a clue? Maybe Knightmare knows if he's had contact with them? Peter R 10:30, 11 Nov 2005 (UTC)

I Quit

Well it would appear that i am not welcome here anymore. I apologize for any problems i might have caused. As it is i iwll say my final good byes and you will never hear from me again. So remove me from the admin list and for the server.

Oh and Happy Armistice Day

Knightmare 17:30, 11 Nov 2005

Sorry to hear that you don't want to stay and fix things around here. We really need your help. What is "armistice", BTW? Peter R 18:23, 11 Nov 2005 (UTC)
I'm also sorry to hear that Knightmare doesn't plan to return. I think I'll see if his e-mail address works.
Armistice Day, Veterans Day and Remembrance Day are all pretty much the same thing. A day in honor of soldiers and veterans who fought for their countries. I think, specifically armistice is the agreement to stop a war and Armistice Day began in honor of the peace agreement that ended World War I in Europe. --CocoaZen 01:02, 12 Nov 2005 (UTC)
When I retun from my duty I will assist in the fixes of the pages, but after that I will assist only as asked by Peter or CZ. Knightmare 18:55 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)

The Dakara decision

This is a general question, originated in Talk:Dakara. Compare Dakara and wikipedia:Dakara for similar texts. Peter R 08:21, 11 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I had thought that since it is still wiki that the text could used in another wiki page. I mean afterall most of the pages concerning the Stargate series is already on wiki and if we cannot use the factual data on another wiki page I do not see the point of a wikicity of Stargate. Is it copyright infringement? Mrja84 03:04, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Maybe it isn't as "dangerous" as copying from another website, but it is still a method that we've found hard to accept. Remember that we've had big trouble cleaning up a huge copyright infringement (and we're still working on that, still 30 articles or so left), so that's why we are a little picky. I'm sorry about that, but this might be a good time to establish how we should do from here on. I'm therefore moving this discussion to SGCommand:Community Portal/Copyrights for a general discussion. Peter R 05:59, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)
IMO, we should keep all text original, so I think we shouldn't copy from other wikis.--GingerM 15:17, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)
I agree. We have just used the structure as a template, and that is OK. We shouldn't use any links or text on the main page that we haven't thought of using ourselves, but the structure gathered from MA is good, and we should keep that. Peter R 19:45, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Is this an "official" policy now, are we going to continue the copyrights project to get rid of all wikipedia material (which will take a while), or is it going to be one of those, "get rid of it if you find it but don't go looking for it" policies? BTW: The whole copyright inringement category has been finished now, the only articles in it are the two templates and Dakara (which we're discussing now). It musn't have updated at your end yet. :). Also copying from wikipedia isn't copyright infringement as it's been released under the GNU Free Documentation License, but usually frowned upon in most wikis anyway --GingerM 20:06, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.