Archives Search Engine

Body:
Subject:
From:
(email address of poster)
List:
(limit search to one mailing list)
Date:
(e.g. 10 Jun 2005, Jun 2005, or 2005)
   Search tips

Searching for: +path:wiki-genpages +(+date:apr +date:2009)
Viewing 1-25 of 32 matches from 36,127,719 documents1 2 | Next
1. Re: [WIKI-GENPAGES] Participation and opinions about the future of Wiki genealogy sites [1]
As I said to Twigs, I usually take things literally. When someone writes "You" I presume they really did mean to say "You". > You wrote, ".... who thought their copyright had been infringed." > Thank you for clarifying. From the limited experience I've had with > the > "law" on this and related issues, it's odd situations where the > defense > doesn't come in really "presumed innocent," and it can be difficult > to prove > a negative. You might find Mike Goads article interesting. Also Templeton
2. Re: [WIKI-GENPAGES] Participation and opinions about the future of Wiki genealogy sites [1]
Hi Bill, others: If the law was really so black and white, we'd not have so many attorneys. Most of the lawyers and orators I know find _great_ arguments from within simple sets of issues. You wrote of someone else's take, "Copyright-ability hinges on whether there's a unique intellectual contribution. ... Supreme Court ruling .... how much work ("Sweat of Brow") you put into something has nothing to do with its copyright status...." Humm...As I recall from the Wikipedia entry about the phone book case
3. Re: [WIKI-GENPAGES] Participation and opinions about the future ofWiki genealogy sites [1]
Hi Twigs > Your 'Southwest Virginia Project' looks like a lot of work. It > will be a > wonderful thing when you are done. You've put a lot of work in it > already. > By the way, I just googled it and your WeRelate came up in the > first place > on the page. That is always good to see. You are likely to get a > steady > traffic from that. Thanks for the compliments Yes, it does take a bit of effort. I'm not quite sure if its ready for prime time yet or not. Sometimes I think I need to go o
4. Re: [WIKI-GENPAGES] More than a Database, etc (replying to Marie and Dallan) [1]
Marie and her wikimaster would indeed be welcome on Familypedia (the Genealogy Wikia) if either of them decided that their separate wiki wasn't doing enough for them. Or even before then: copy your work over for greater security. The GFDL ensures that anyone copying it is obliged to acknowledge its source. An advantage of world-wide wikis such as WeRelate and the Wikia is that those of your relatives who changed their names by marriage or anything else don't have to be sidelined but can link in with other
5. Re: [WIKI-GENPAGES] Participation and opinions about the future of Wiki genealogy sites [1]
My opinion is hardly important. But I first was troubled by the "junk genealogy" conversations going on. Last month, or maybe in February the conversation was about finding cemeteries (then later other data) and emailing the people that had submitted them (like genweb, etc.) and getting them to say they could put them on WeRelate. There were comments made that copyright did not apply since facts cannot be copyrighted. They are right about facts and copyright, but not about someone else's list of facts.
6. Re: [WIKI-GENPAGES] Participation and opinions about the future of Wiki genealogy sites [1]
Bill: Ahh.... but the burden of proof applied in copyright "law" is somewhat unique, isn't it. You wrote, "... One can always sue. Whether its worth it or not, depends on the case." I don't want to twist your words,--might you clarify the side to which you referred when you said, "...can always sue?" You wrote, "... Sweat of Brow does not translate to copy-right." I'm suggesting the premise of the argument might be invalid. In other words, what makes you the judge of "why" someone else's material is NOT
7. Re: [WIKI-GENPAGES] Participation and opinions about the future of Wiki genealogy sites [1]
Hi there .... You can check with your own sources about civil/criminal law theory ... generally, I've understood it is a difference of degree (within a reasonable doubt/beyond a reasonable doubt). I'm not arguing "with" the law, but the way the "copyright" arguments about the law extend in a general sense to genealogy (_especially_ in genealogy). Ditto, the way those arguments have come to be applied, especially to material posted to the internet. "Know enough to be dangerous" might be descriptive. I'm
8. Re: [WIKI-GENPAGES] Participation and opinions about the future of Wiki genealogy sites [1]
I've heard others mention Gramps. I need to check out what it is exactly. I've made so many contacts on Facebook it is amazing. I've also had so much help from there. You should blog as well. There is a wonderful community of genea bloggers. -- Twigs (Sheri) ^..^ http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~familytwigs/index.htm TwigTalk http://familytwigs.blogspot.com/ SeekingOurTwigs http://groups.yahoo.com/group/seekingourtwigs/
9. Re: [WIKI-GENPAGES] Participation and opinions about the future of Wiki genealogy sites [1]
Hi Twigs I usually take things people say as literal....unless its really obvious that its not. The discussion of Copy-right has obvious relevance in terms of a wiki, and what can be accepted as input to the wiki and what can't. The issues for US GenWeb are also interesting, but not really wiki related. Interesting conversation though. 'Fraid I have my hands full with the Southwest Virginia Project, so am not likely to volunteer on USGenWeb. On the census transcription project, to be honest,
10. Re: [WIKI-GENPAGES] Participation and opinions about the future of Wiki genealogy sites [1]
I would argue with the court that I pay for the phone number therefore I am the only one allowed to give it to anyone or no one if I choose (and without paying extra fees to have it secret!) . . . . :o) LOL. We all tend to interpret such airy fairy laws, ones that can be interpreted in any way the politics or minds of the judges are for that day, to fit our own view of our own personal space/desires. You said: *"However, it makes me wonder why you are working in an Wiki Environment since the object of a
11. Re: [WIKI-GENPAGES] Participation and opinions about the future of Wiki genealogy sites [1]
> I don't want to twist your words,--might you clarify the side to > which you > referred when you said, "...can always sue?" Wouldn't be obvious that the person doing the suing was the person, or entity, who thought their copyright had been infringed? > > You wrote, "... Sweat of Brow does not translate to copy-right." > I'm suggesting the premise of the argument might be invalid. In > other words, > what makes you the judge of "why" someone else's material is NOT > subject to > copyright in fact?
12. Re: [WIKI-GENPAGES] Participation and opinions about the future of Wiki genealogy sites [1]
> I would argue with the court that I pay for the phone number > therefore I am > the only one allowed to give it to anyone or no one if I choose > (and without > paying extra fees to have it secret!) You may not like the Supreme Court's decision, but their decision IS the law of the land. > > We all tend to > interpret such airy fairy laws, ones that can be interpreted in any > way the > politics or minds of the judges are for that day, to fit our own > view of our > own personal space/desires.
13. Re: [WIKI-GENPAGES] Participation and opinions about the future of Wiki genealogy sites [1]
Twigs wrote" > If this guy is right, and I am not convinced he is, then I am > wasting my > time. I am a genweb coordinator. When I took over my county site > it had > less than 100 pages. I have worked hard and spent money I could > have used > in my own research to make it a site that my users could find help on. Yes, that's the problem for many folks. There are a number of issues with copyright that have not be tested in courts of law. The "Sweat of Brow" argument that you raise, however
14. [WIKI-GENPAGES] Participation and opinions about the future of Wiki genealogy sites [1]
Interested in your opinions on the future of genealogy wikis and specific data on your interaction with the various sites. Warmest regards, Beth Gay, List Administrator
15. Re: [WIKI-GENPAGES] More than a Database [1]
An issue of interest to genealogists using a wiki is its potential for long term survivability. If you are working only for today, this is not a relevant problem. If you hope your work will accomplish something after you're gone (Which I believe Twigs said she did), then its a very relevant issue. Something like "Genealogy Wiki" (or as they seem to prefer these days "FamilyPedia") you have an association with a very large organization with a product (Wikipedia) that's not going to dissappear anyt
16. Re: [WIKI-GENPAGES] More than a Database [1]
Marie, That is nice! WeRelate doesn't allow anything like that. The PBWiki allows a lot more creativity and formatting choices in the look and set up. It's great. All of you have put in a lot work. It's a great wiki. Do you have any idea how much traffic you get and have you had contacts outside of the participating editors on the wiki? Your site and blog is very nice too. -- Twigs (Sheri) ^..^ http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~familytwigs/index.htm TwigTalk http://familytwigs.blo
17. Re: [WIKI-GENPAGES] Participation and opinions about the future of Wikigenealogy sites [1]
Beth, Regretfully to say I have not been on in some time. Have had back surgery, several other things interfered. Will have to try and get back on soon and relearn whatever I forgot. John -----Original Message----- From: wiki-genpages-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:wiki-genpages-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Beth Gay Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 9:23 PM To: wiki-genpages@rootsweb.com Subject: [WIKI-GENPAGES] Participation and opinions about the future of Wikigenealogy sites Interested in your opini
18. Re: [WIKI-GENPAGES] More than a Database [1]
This is a very nice website! I used pbwiki for a general-purpose wiki once and quite liked it. It's sometimes nice to be able to control who has access to and who can edit the pages, which you can't get at WeRelate or Wikia. And *if* you decided to someday migrate your pages to another wiki, you would of course be welcome at WeRelate and I assume at Wikia as well. BTW, no one has mentioned http://wiki.familysearch.org. It's a terrific site for research-guide collaboration. The LDS Church has assigned
19. Re: [WIKI-GENPAGES] Participation and opinions about the future of Wiki genealogy sites [1]
I'm not sure it is worth all the work to get it set up. I make so many contacts now from the "social" type of sites. I've never made so many contacts since I joined Facebook and started blogging. I can't believe how useful it has been. I am still not sure about WeRelate. Everytime I think I am, their discussions turn to something dumb and I just give up. So does anyone have ideas about *where *the best wiki site is? I've played around with Wetpaint and I think it could be useful to a researcher if the
20. Re: [WIKI-GENPAGES] Participation and opinions about the future of Wiki genealogy sites [1]
You do know the phone book comment was said as a joke? Personally, I wish they'd stop with the phone books. I have 5 laying here for the same small area, plopped on my doorstep this year, all but one yellow, all different names and I can't find anything thing in them. I have to go online to look up a number. Save the trees already and stop with the phone books. * At any rate, Beth is now sorry she woke the list. * My Belief: The supreme court is a political body. That's why presidents hope there will
21. Re: [WIKI-GENPAGES] Participation and opinions about the future of Wiki genealogy sites [1]
Hi Bill, You wrote, "... stating a commonly accepted viewpoint among those who have looked closely at this issue." Hopefully you, too, can see that it's not _you_ with whom I disagree, but the viewpoints, as above. I was drawn to Familytwigs comments about the cemetery listings, etc. Goodness gracious--why would any person in our community use "copyright" as justification to lift a body of someone else's documented research! The genweb volunteers (and those who volunteer with similar organizations) hav
22. Re: [WIKI-GENPAGES] Participation and opinions about the future ofWiki genealogy sites [1]
I must have strange family as I've yet to be able to use the merge except within my own gedcom. You said: *"Today I and a person who moonlights occasionally are the only people writing code for WeRelate. I've chosen to go this route rather than raising money from investors and hiring a team of developers in order to ensure that *WeRelate will always be free*. It's open-content and I'm committed to that."* Thank you. I had made an assumption that affiliated with Allen County Library meant that, but I am g
23. Re: [WIKI-GENPAGES] Participation and opinions about the future of Wiki genealogy sites [1]
One can always sue. Whether its worth it or not, depends on the case. The point was that Sweat of Brow does not translate to copy-right. What translates to copy-right is the creative aspects. If you could find a creative way to present a phone book, something other than an alphabetical listing, then you could I presume copyright it. Since the data itself is not copyrightable, that wouldn't stop anyone from reproducing the phone book in alphabetical format. On Apr 16, 2009, at 12:53 PM, GeneJ wrote
24. Re: [WIKI-GENPAGES] Participation and opinions about the future of Wiki genealogy sites [1]
If this guy is right, and I am not convinced he is, then I am wasting my time. I am a genweb coordinator. When I took over my county site it had less than 100 pages. I have worked hard and spent money I could have used in my own research to make it a site that my users could find help on. I have put a lot of my own research aside to work on this site. It's long, hard work reading a cemetery. It is hard work transcribing. I don't do it so someone can come along and just take my work and put it anywhere
25. Re: [WIKI-GENPAGES] Participation and opinions about the future of Wiki genealogy sites [1]
> Everytime I think I am, their > discussions turn to something dumb and I just give up. So, what kind of discussion is it that doesn't appeal to you? > So does anyone > have ideas about *where *the best wiki site is? I've played around > with > Wetpaint and I think it could be useful to a researcher if they were > willing to "get it noticed". > I'm not as impressed with the wiki thing as I was at one time. > I'm very interested in everyones opinions on this. > >> Interested in your opinions on the fu
Viewing 1-25 of 32 matches from 36,127,719 documents1 2 | Next

CPU seconds used 0.559914