| Revision as of 18:53, 4 May 2005 editDuk (talk | contribs)10,888 edits →Copyright violation- AGAIN← Previous edit | Revision as of 22:57, 6 June 2005 edit undoUgen64 (talk | contribs)15,266 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
| I reverted to the oldest version that doesn't contain copyright violations (and deleted all other versions.)--] 18:42, 4 May 2005 (UTC) | I reverted to the oldest version that doesn't contain copyright violations (and deleted all other versions.)--] 18:42, 4 May 2005 (UTC) | ||
| :Well, if we're sentence nitpicking: "Beyond infrastructure development, the GAP was established '''to eliminate disparities in the levels of development existing between this region and other regions of Turkey by raising incoming levels and living standards of the people who live in Southeastern Turkey'''" occurs at - if we are to believe the Canadian government, that block of text is copyright to the U.S. Government (State Department, PD in other words). The text that is apparently the source of the copyvio, on the other hand, says "The purpose of the GAP is '''to eliminate disparities in the levels of development existing between this region and other regions of Turkey by raising income levels and living standards of the people who live in Southeastern Turkey'''." Unless: a. the Canadian government site is lying; b. the State Department violated copyright; or c. both of these organizations happened to use the exact same sentence to describe the exact same thing, it seems that your argument applies for both sides. If you can claim copyright violation on one or two sentences (not even identical sentences, but similar sentences), I can claim PD on this exact phrase, an exact copy of the supposed copyvio material. – ] 22:57, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 22:57, 6 June 2005
Not violating copyright
A total of 7 websites are using my work . I wrote this material. Its my work. --Cool Cat 09:14, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
correction 8 , they alter it minorly apperantly. --Cool Cat 09:47, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I know I wrote it, it was mass produced offline. So I have to make a choice, allow my work to be deleted or loose my annonymity on the web which I maintained since I touched the net. Hmm... --Cool Cat 10:08, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
GAP Project/Temp
a bare-bones stub. — Davenbelle 09:32, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)
- You know, you are converting a well written article into a stub.--Cool Cat 10:10, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Copyright violation- AGAIN
The copyvio listing for this page was left at Misplaced Pages:Copyright problems after someone cleared the copyvio tag on Apr. 22.
When I reviewed and cleared the listing on May 4 there were still copyright violations in the article from eg. But the Southeastern Anatolia Project encompasses more than dams and tunnels.. The violations include full sentances and derived writing.
I reverted to the oldest version that doesn't contain copyright violations (and deleted all other versions.)--Duk 18:42, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
- Well, if we're sentence nitpicking: "Beyond infrastructure development, the GAP was established to eliminate disparities in the levels of development existing between this region and other regions of Turkey by raising incoming levels and living standards of the people who live in Southeastern Turkey" occurs at - if we are to believe the Canadian government, that block of text is copyright to the U.S. Government (State Department, PD in other words). The text that is apparently the source of the copyvio, on the other hand, says "The purpose of the GAP is to eliminate disparities in the levels of development existing between this region and other regions of Turkey by raising income levels and living standards of the people who live in Southeastern Turkey." Unless: a. the Canadian government site is lying; b. the State Department violated copyright; or c. both of these organizations happened to use the exact same sentence to describe the exact same thing, it seems that your argument applies for both sides. If you can claim copyright violation on one or two sentences (not even identical sentences, but similar sentences), I can claim PD on this exact phrase, an exact copy of the supposed copyvio material. – ugen64 22:57, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)