Licensing

6 views
Skip to first unread message

gwern

unread,
Apr 5, 2009, 11:54:27 AM4/5/09
to Wrong Tomorrow
Has there been any discussion about the licensing of Wrong Tomorrow
content? (As in, a Creative Commons license like CC-BY.)

I was thinking of submitting predictions as a regular part of my RSS
reading, but if WT is just going to proprietary, I might as well just
hold onto them in favor of some site which would be Free. Hobby
websites have a bad tendency to disappear, and Free content means it's
at least legally possible for someone else to pick up the torch.

--
gwern

pvg

unread,
Apr 5, 2009, 12:38:04 PM4/5/09
to Wrong Tomorrow


On Apr 5, 8:54 am, gwern <gwe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Has there been any discussion about the licensing of [...]

As a friend of mine once said, don't be such a librarian.

-pvg

maciej

unread,
Apr 5, 2009, 12:41:20 PM4/5/09
to Wrong Tomorrow
What exactly do you want me to license? The links point to outside
content, the descriptions are all written by people making the
submissions and I doubt are long enough to fall under copyright
provisions. My role is to curate the stuff and keep the server
running.

Gwern Branwen

unread,
Apr 7, 2009, 9:21:47 AM4/7/09
to wrong-t...@googlegroups.com

I think if more people took a more long-term perspective - like
librarians do - the Internet would be a better place for't. :(

--
gwern

Gwern Branwen

unread,
Apr 7, 2009, 9:33:12 AM4/7/09
to wrong-t...@googlegroups.com
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 12:41 PM, maciej <mcegl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> What exactly do you want me to license?   The links point to outside
> content, the descriptions are all written by people making the
> submissions and I doubt are long enough to fall under copyright
> provisions.

You would probably be wrong about that. _de minimis_ is very minimal
indeed. (An example: dictionaries are allowed to copyright a
single-letter change in a single word.)

Links to content, descriptions, status of correctness... these are all
copyrightable, and thus, copyrighted. (After all, it's not like
Wikipedia articles are all copyrighted & under the GFDL - except for
the External links section, y'all can do anything you want with those
sections.)

Or to put it another way: if there is stuff to copyright, then a Free
license would be a very good thing to put up. If there is nothing to
copyright, then putting up a Free license costs only the minute or two
it takes to add the legal wording.

> My role is to curate the stuff and keep the server
> running.

Hey. Don't be such a librarian.

--
gwern

maciej

unread,
Apr 7, 2009, 2:38:51 PM4/7/09
to Wrong Tomorrow
I will put this issue aside to think about once more pressing things
are taken care of. It's all academic if the site isn't usable...
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages