Talk:Iota Sigma Pi
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(A) Wow, a little bit trigger-happy on copyright violations. Not surprising, I guess. I'm still writing the article. Next time i'll sandbox it first.
(B) However, I do think a three-sentence factual description of an organization taken from its webpage presents a strong fair use claim. The fair use analysis: (a) purpose & use is wikipedia; (b) nature of copyrighted work is factual and descriptive; (c) amount and substantiality were taken was small--3 sentences out of the description; and (d) effect on the marketplace is, precisely, nill. There is certainly no market for licensing those three sentences and accompanying bulletpoints.
(C) Regardless, I have written a new draft that hits the highlights at Talk:Iota_Sigma_Pi/Temp. Unfortunately, one can't really "write original" lists of awards--that would fall under the merger doctrine.
--LQ 22:31, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
- For what it's worth, a bot scans new pages and noted the possible copyvio at Wikipedia:Suspected copyright violations... it's not that I don't have a life or something. ;)
- Looks good, I've moved the temp to the main article. Sorry to trouble you over a relatively minor issue, I agree that it wasn't a lot of text that was copied that could be rewritten. Thanks for the update. --Interiot 23:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- I figured it had to have been a bot -- anyway, it's good that the bot runs, and good for me to learn how it runs so as not to trigger it in the future. Thanks for your fast action. --LQ 23:11, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
- As far as fair-use goes... we generally try to minimize use of fair use material to those cases that are really needed (in text, it's usually limited only to short attributed quotes). While such a small amount of text may well be legal, one of our main goals is to produce open content that can by as many people in as many situations as possible. (and as an aside, fair use is not clear-cut, it's not possible to definitively say that a certain use falls under US fair use law until sued and a judge evaluates it on an individual basis, so that's another reason to minimize fair use to places where it's really necessary) --Interiot 23:21, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
