| Möchtest du Administrator bei Wikitravel werden? Dann bewirb dich jetzt hier! |
Wikitravel Diskussion:Creative Commons Lizenzentwurf - Namensnennung — Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen 2.0
Aus Wikitravel
So, I need to know really soon if this is going to be the official license for German-language Wikitravel. I have a few problems with it, namely:
- It's not compatible with the license used for the other 4 Wikitravel versions. We're still using the 1.0 version, and we haven't been able to upgrade yet.
- This is not a German Wikitravel; it's a German-language Wikitravel. Since German is spoken in a number of countries, I'm not sure I understand if having the Germany-localized version is the right thing.
I'd really appreciate some discussion on this -- I don't understand at all what the pages are about it in German. --Evan 23:11, 8. Okt 2004 (EDT)
Evan, some time ago, I have asked in the englisch version "Traveler's Pub" if somebody could explain, what national right has to be applied if a copyright violation is done in Uganda, but the upload was from Germany and the server's location is in the US. I can't find the link any more and the pub has been sweept. Anyway, seems as if noboby can give simple answers to this. As far as I could find out, we have an incredibly complicated judical situation. I also have asked for a discussion among us German speaking bevore the German Wikitravel had been opened, but things still are everthing else but clear. I have checked the Frech Wikitravel, where they actually have a simular problem, too, but they have solved it by ignoring it.
The problem for many countries is that their legal system is pretty different from US law cencernig things like copyright. Thus, the original CC by-sa may work fine as long as everthing happens in US or countries with a very simular copright law, but may lead into judical nirwana when different countries are implied. That's the reason why adaptions (not simply translations) to different national laws have been made. If there ever would be a copyright dispute about stuff from the German Wikitravel, you can be almost sure that German, Austrian, Swiss, Italian, French or what ever non-US law is involved.
Our (basically my) first approach was to explain that we use CC by-sa 1.0 (in the original US version) and that there also exist some adaptions for several other countries where larger German speaking groups live. I also wanted to have files with the full text of the adaption to each of this coutries. Unfortunately, neither me nor Denisoliver were able to find national adaptions to version 1.0, but only to 2.0 on the Creativ Commons site. Furthermore, many coutries have not yet an adaption, but only a draft for it.
Well, that's the whole story about Wikitravel:Attribution-ShareAlike License, the Article about the license, linked from the main page.
Translation of Wikitravel:Attribution-ShareAlike License
- The Attribution-ShareAlike Lizenz from Creative Commons (http://www.creativecommons.org/) exists in several versions. All language versions of Wikitravle use Attribution-ShareAlike 1.0 License mandatory.
- Furthermor, there exists a version 2.0 which again has several adaptions to the national laws. Some of them are only as drafts. Those are:
- Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 License (USA) - The original version 2.0, basing on US-american law.
- Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 License (DE) - Deutsche adaption of Version 2.0.
- Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Entwurf (AT) - Österreichischer draft for Version 2.0.
- Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Entwurf (IT) - Italienischer draft for Version 2.0.
- Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Entwurf (FR) - Französischer draft for Version 2.0.
- Swiss adation or draft do not exist.
There are 2 links to this article, one from the above Wikitravel:Attribution-ShareAlike License and the other from Wikitravel:CC-by-sa. Even Wikitravel:CC-by-sa says that our license is the original CC by-sa 1.0, but that there also exists a German translation (what is wrong, its an adaption). It also says that the German translation may be quite usefull as an orientation for non-english speaking people, but that the license aplicable in case of doubt is the original CC by-sa 1.0.
Finaly, let me say that we really have tried to find a practicabel way to somehow ship around the judical riffs of inconsistency. Neverthless, if you can give some usefuull hints, we always would appreceate it.
-- Hansm 04:05, 9. Okt 2004 (EDT)
That makes a lot of sense. I would like to move forward to the 2.0 version of the licenses, with localized versions for the different language versions of Wikitravel. It's just going to be a lot of work to get there! B-) Sorry if I sounded a little anxious. --Evan 11:58, 9. Okt 2004 (EDT)
