EnWiki code of manners

[Morrus]

I agree, but governments have a habit of giving people the right to do it.

But you, are just the man to solve it. By having people agree to have their posts wikified as part of the registration.

No, I'm not comfortable with that.

It involves remixing their work into derivative work.

It involves mixing their derivative work into derivative work.

But I'm not really discussing the legal side of it, or planning on getting legal advice on a D&D messageboard; I have much better resources for that! What I'm interested in here is, as the thread title mentions, the manners - what courtesy demands, and what is fair.

 

[generalhenry]

I have much better resources for that!

I should hope so

I see it as the kind of thing that's worth talking to a lawyer about. It's a small legal issue, but still a real one.


That aside you're right, if the community expectations are set right, there shouldn't be any issues.

No one posts anything here that they expect royalties for, but it's still possible to anger someone by repurposing their posts. Copyright or no that's something that should be avoided.



In the long run, I suspect wikifying anything from a regular like The Jester will simply be expected. The expectations of long term community members is mostly a non issue.

The pitfall in my mind is a some one new who has different expectations. Which is why adding it to the terms of use seems to be right. The legal implications are secondary but I think the one fix would solve both problems.



But I do see the obvious objection. It involves banning anyone who doesn't want their work to end up on the wiki. Which, while presumably rare, is problematic.

 

[MaineCoon]

Im curious how many people vote 'no' have posted some or many contributions, and how many who vote 'yes' have posted none.

With these things, being a wiki admin myself, I've seen generally that those who post content at all usually have little to no problem with people transcribing it to a wiki, but those aren't contributors themselves feel the opposite and think transcribing it to a wiki without explicit permission would generally be improper.

 

[FireLance]

I can't speak for others, but I personally would have no problems with any of my creations being posted to ENWiki provided it's attributed.

A link back to the post, thread or blog entry where I posted it originally would be nice, though.

 

[Nifft]

I think it would be... oddd...behaviour of someone to use WotC's work to freely create stuff and then try to establish restrictons on what they've created. In my eyes, that would be the height of hypocrisy.

I dunno. I don't think all d20 publishers are hypocrites.

- - -

Anyway, IMHO wikis work best when they are non-owned content -- facts and indexes, for example. That way a viewer's technical rights match his moral rights.

Finally, with factual data, anyone can review and cross-check a new revision. With creative works, it's easy for a sloppy editor to make significant changes -- and if the original author doesn't re-check his old work, those changes may remain indefinitely.

So: IMHO the wiki is an awesome resource for indexes. Everyone can and should edit those, and they are "factual" in that they either point to the thing they describe, or they don't, so even the most naive editor can't make an irreversible error.

Cheers, -- N

 

[ff6shadow]

I don't think you should do it without checking with them. Then again, I don't feel like messing with the wiki, so I'll be leaving a tag in any of my work that people can wiki if they like as long as they leave a link in the thread and keep it updated with changes.