Jump to content

Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2019 July 1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1 July 2019

[edit]
Resolved
Jim Donelon was since re-created with just the infobox from the old version. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:25, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
We have over 400 pages of Meanings of minor planet names that may have the same issue, so I picked the 100001–101000 example at random. For most of the entries, the description in the This minor planet was named for... column was copied or very closely paraphrased from the "JPL" source linked in the Ref · Catalog column. This was previously discussed at a tangentially related AfD where some editors felt it was a copyright violation while others argued that the data was "freely available from NASA" and not subject to copyright. JPL's copyright statements [1] [2] may be of use. –dlthewave ☎ 21:36, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Simple phrases such as "This minor planet was named for <name>" cannot be copyrighted. I don't know how many entries fall outside this "simple" phrasing, but it's something to consider. Primefac (talk) 19:40, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have copied this to Wikipedia:Copyright problems/Older consolidated since it's highly unlikely anyone will have time to check these circa 400 articles in the near future. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:25, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As an example see Meanings of minor planet names: 559001–560000 - the entry for 559521 Sonbird (the only entry on the page ) is a word for word copy of [3] - an IAU document. While the IAU - does seem to release items under a creative commons licence, it is CC BY 4.0 [4] - can we use CC_BY-4.0 text, or can we only use CC_BY-3.0 or lower?Nigel Ish (talk) 10:24, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:COMPLIC, CC BY-SA 4.0 is not compatible and I have trimmed the offending text. Primefac (talk) 11:09, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
How about the stuff sourced from JPL? - this is similarly a direct copy of the text (and it isn't simple, non-copyrightable, data) - compare the entry for 518458 Roblambert here with the source at JPL. Is this pd-gov-NASA or copyright because JPL is a privately run contractor?Nigel Ish (talk) 18:39, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
According to [5], JPL-authored documents are sponsored by NASA under Contract NAS7-030010. All documents available from this server may be protected under the U.S. and Foreign Copyright Laws, which sounds a lot like "no" unless a specific release type is given. Primefac (talk) 19:06, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
So this looks very much like all the entries need to be reviewed and trimmed down as appropriate - oh joy!Nigel Ish (talk) 19:35, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Could anyone please let me know what license(s) the https://www.wgsbn-iau.org/ website needs to provide in order to allow a verbatim citation of their minor-planet namings on Wikipedia? Anyone? Thx, Rfassbind – talk 23:55, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Alternatively - why don't you stop directly copying sources? We shouldn't be doing that even if the sources were public domain or had a suitable licence, which these sources do not. Please stop plagiarising sources.Nigel Ish (talk) 08:54, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Primefac: The license is CC-BY 4.0, which is compatible. It's only the SA part that makes CC-BY-SA 4.0 incompatible. Sennecaster (Chat) 11:51, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Don't know what to say; either I misread the license when I posted, or they've changed it since then. I suspect it's the latter, given that I don't go searching for COMPLIC unless I specifically see the SA. Either way, moot point now I guess. Primefac (talk) 14:00, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Pared down this entry only. Extraneous details removed, but listing who or what the subject is, is not copyrightable. Sennecaster (Chat) 14:17, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved
Closely related to the above entry, List of minor planets consists of over 400 pages that attempt to reproduce the Minor Planet Center database. See copyright statements from sources JPL [6] [7] and MPL [8]. This was also discussed at AfD where some editors argued that raw data is not subject to copyright and that it comes from public-domain government sources. Please note that the data may have originated from private contractors and was not necessarily produced by NASA employees. –dlthewave ☎ 21:50, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Not only is this an obvious copyright violation, but many of the entries we have copy-pasted are inaccurate and contradict our existing, better-written articles. NASA and other such bodies are not reliable sources for, for instance, classical Japanese literature and mythology.[9] The poor English on some of those entries implies NASA just took copy that had written by the planets' discoverers and regurgitated without any form of copy-editing, so we should definitely not be following suit. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 06:55, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Even if a site is "public-domain government sources" and not subject to copyright there seems to be copy/paste issues that, as mentioned by @Primefac: as possibly falling "outside this "simple" phrasing", could mean there are unintended attrition issues and could still be considered plagiarism, that does need to be examined?. Otr500 (talk) 11:40, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion seems to be about the "Meanings of minor planet names" lists, not the lists of minor planets. Peter James (talk) 13:39, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • No copyright concern. Material PD or appropriately licensed for use. The articles in the "List of minor planets" series of articles do not contain any copyrightable material. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:17, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Copyright_problems/2019_July_1&oldid=1052693878"