Non-original Content

1. Non-original Content

   #1

   I was going to put this in a general forum entry, but I wanted Strolen at least to provide some feedback first.
   
   The submission http://strolen.com/viewing/Styrics brings up a thought for me.
   
   This is essentially a repost, but not really different from hundreds of other fan-wikis scattered over the internet.  Priv8eye made no attempt to claim this as his own - apart from the submission itself indicating his authorship, and he included attribution to the inspiring author in the text.
   
   So, how should we handle this type of submission? 
   
   Report the submission, and pull it back into their 'in work'?
   Vote it into oblivion since its not his work?
   Vote it high, since the material is decent and usable?
   
   My only concern with the sub is the phrase 'author'.
   
   I think for submissions which are reprints of other peoples works we need to remove the field 'author' and replace it with 'submitted by'.  This is only for the display field and for submissions that would be marked as 'Non-Author' via a checkbox or perhaps using the Creative Commons License drop down.
   
   Or, we can make it policy that content must be the authors own work unless the content being used has an appropriate CCL designation?
   
   Just thoughts - I don't think there is any urgency to this.
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   

2. Re: Non-original Content

   #2

   I am against somebody reposting somebody else's work.
   
   If the author wants to repost, of course. But taking something not yours and simply posting it without trying to get permissions is iffy at best. In this case, it is a published setting and creature/society.
   
   Not quite sure how it made it through the gauntlet of original commenters honestly.
   
   I did it with Coley's chart o bashing death and I did it unashamedly with the roman legion ranks so not sure how much of a hypocrite I am currently being. (Chart, I couldn't find anywhere and the author found us and actually appreciated the memory. Roman legions totally stolen.)
   
   So whatever we decide on this would fit towards the Roman one too.
   
   Right now, I think removing them both would be appropriate. I don't want to start a precedent in allowing reposts just because you link back to it. In hindsight, that is kinda bullshit.
   
   

3. Re: Non-original Content

   #3

   Ok. The only reason I was entertaining the thought was the preponderance of fan created wiki sites.
   
   But your direction is clear :)
   
   
   
   

4. Re: Non-original Content

   #4

   
   Well, apparently I have a dog (chihuahua)  in this fight :P
   
   http://strolen.com/viewing/A_Catastrophe_of_Curses
   
   Approximately 47% of the content is my own, with summaries and links to other submissions. 
   
   The intent was to bring all of the available curses into one easy-to-roll table.
   
   Thoughts?

5. Re: Non-original Content

   #5

   Edited the content because it made no sense. ;)
   
   ==============
   
   If it is our stuff, then it is free game for idea building and such.
   
   And if a sub is based on an idea but they do their own thing with it, then that would work too? If that David Eddings thing that you linked to is simply based on his writings but the author wrote fan fiction, well that is fine. If he is just regurgitating somebody else's ideas or taking stuff out of the book and making a write-up for it. That is a copyright issue. You can't copyright an idea, but you can copyright the expression of the idea. I haven't read that David Eddings so I am clueless if it is a fan fiction society based on something in the book (OK) or documenting the society directly from the book (not OK).
   
   But the stuff on our site, it is there to link together, rewrite, re-imagine be creative together etc... The creative commons only requests a link back to the original so you could actually get away with a little bit as long as they link back to us.

6. Re: Non-original Content

   #6

   Rubs hands.
   
   Working on meeting AG in Florence this weekend. Won't that be the dragon's roar?  (cat's meow seemed dumb and for some reason I was stuck on that)

7. Re: Non-original Content

   #7

   Cool!
   
   Say Hi for me :)
   

Administrators · All categories · Guildhall