Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2019 December 30

30 December 2019

John Krubsack (history · last edit · rewrite) from https://web.archive.org/web/20090116234905/http://www.arborsmith.com/krubsack.html. There is an OTRS ticket for this content at ticket:2009012710024558 that contains a GFDL-only release. The Wikipedia:Licensing update prohibits GFDL-only content added to Wikipedia from outside sources after 1 November 2008 as it can not be relicensed. This article was created on 22 December 2008 and permission was recieved under the GFDL on 27 January 2009, both of which are after 1 November 2008. Therefore, I do not believe our continued use of the text after relicensing to CC-BY-SA-3.0/GFDL is valid under the terms of the GFDL. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 02:23, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Article deleted due to copyright concerns. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:28, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Maya MacGuineas (history · last edit · rewrite) from https://web.archive.org/web/20090925002553/http://www.crfb.org/biography/maya-macguineas-0. There is an OTRS ticket for this content at ticket:2009092310062572 that does not appear to clearly specify a license for the copied content, instead stating that there is "permission to reuse" the content. Another, apparently unrelated, email got merged into the ticket. This email was used to accept the copied content as GFDL text. This all happened after the 1 November 2008 deadline for GFDL outside content before the Wikipedia:Licensing update, so addition of GFDL-only text violates the terms of the license. In 2010, the CRFB released the copied content under CC BY-NC-3.0 [1][2], which is also an incompatible license. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 18:09, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@AntiCompositeNumber: It looks like I applied the OTRS tag to the article talk page in 2009 after merging the tickets. I cannot see why I merged those two unrelated tickets together... it must have been an error. I remember at that point I dealt with mainly image permissions and would seek to merge tickets as most sent multiple emails. As you've said, there is not clearly stated license for the text and I agree it looks like a copyright violation. I apologize for my errant actions. Killiondude (talk) 18:24, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@AntiCompositeNumber and Killiondude: I looked at the reported text, it's mostly her past titles and organizations she worked for. This probably needs copyediting more than anything to change the close paraphrasing. --evrik ^(talk) 19:04, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that and a liberal application of revdel. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 19:07, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's not in the lead or the education, it's the professional section that needs rewriting. --evrik ^(talk) 19:10, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:28, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
H. A. Brendekilde (history · last edit · rewrite) from Sonne, Ralph (2018). H.A. Brendekilde : værk og betydning i dansk kunst- og kulturhistorie. København: Multivers. ISBN 9788779176249. OCLC 1061862715. Permission was recieved in ticket:2019080210003836 for the copied content under the terms of the CC BY-SA-4.0 license. CC BY-SA-4.0 is not compatible with Wikipedia's CC BY-SA-3.0 license, so the release should not have been accepted. The content was copied from a print work that I do not have access to, so I have been unable to determine the extent of the issue. Based on context (the text was already in the article on 2019-08-21 and the citation of the book in Special:Diff/886507293), I believe the content is what was added by User:Villy Fink Isaksen in these edits. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 20:42, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Since this is a recent addition, I've asked the copyright holder to consider licensing under CC BY-SA-3.0. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 21:32, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS Ticket received, article now licensed and compatible with CC-BY-SA. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 00:55, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]