Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [bukowsko_triangle] Polish Census 1931

Expand Messages
  • Philip Semanchuk
    ... Thanks for not taking my ranting personally, which would have been easy to do. It was not directed at you. I recently read about a study which said that
    Message 1 of 5 , Feb 28, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      On Feb 28, 2006, at 5:16 PM, Debbie Greenlee wrote:

      > Philip,
      > I appreciate you taking the time to research the site I gave. I think
      > I
      > was originally looking for a map of Poland, circa 1918 and the
      > what-means site was one of the first to come up with the map image.

      Thanks for not taking my ranting personally, which would have been easy
      to do. It was not directed at you. I recently read about a study which
      said that most people believe they've understood the *tone* of an email
      90% of the time when in reality they only get it right about half the

      > I just did a search on Curzon Line - Image and just about all the pages
      > from different web sites have the same pages! Some didn't even change
      > anything!
      > I imagine web site information stealing will get worse. There's just
      > too
      > much out there I suppose to put a stop to it.

      Technically, it isn't stealing. The text and much of the other media on
      Wikipedia is published under the Gnu Free Documentation License, also
      known as copyleft. It basically says, you can copy this for free, as
      long as any derivative works you create from it are also free. It is
      similar to the Creative Commons licenses that I use for some of the
      stuff on semanchuk.com. Licenses like that ensure that common folk like
      you and I will always have access to the information, but that an
      entity like Ancestry.com can't copy the information and sell it to an
      unsuspecting public. Since What-Means.com isn't selling the
      information, they're not violating copyleft. Wikipedia also uses a
      number of copyrighted images, but claims protection under the
      non-profit, educational Fair Use clause of US and international
      copyright law. As far as I know, no one has ever challenged them on

      In short, Wikipedia copiers aren't violating the law (probably), but
      they're sucking resources away from a charity.


      > Philip Semanchuk wrote:
      >> On Feb 28, 2006, at 10:58 AM, Debbie Greenlee wrote:
      >>> Some may find this page interesting as it shows the distribution of
      >>> Poles and Ukes (based on their mother tongue) in Poland at the time
      >>> of
      >>> the 1931 census (pre WWII).
      >>> The link below is given more for the map rather than the
      >>> "encyclopedic"
      >>> information which I believe is similar to wikipdia in that it is
      >>> not
      >>> necessarily authored by scholarly people:
      >>> http://www.what-means.com/encyclopedia/Curzon_line
      >> Indeed, this information has been lifted directly from Wikipedia.
      >> Wikipedia has been such a huge hit that a cottage industry of
      >> repackaging its content has developed. If you look at the Wikipedia
      >> article, you'll see that the text, formatting and graphics are almost
      >> exactly alike:
      >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curzon_line
      >> The What-Means.com article is probably just an old version of a
      >> Wikipedia article.
      >> <off-topic rant>
      >> Wikipedia is the brainchild and walletchild of a lone philanthropist
      >> who truly seems to have other people's best interests at heart.
      >> Wikipedia also get additional funding from other sources including
      >> private individuals like myself. It p*sses me off when Sleazeballs
      >> like
      >> What-Means.com take others' hard work and present it as their own.
      >> <end off-topic rant>
      >> There are lots of other Wikipedia thieves out there who are
      >> potentially
      >> funding their thievery by selling search results to the highest
      >> bidder.
      >> Something like "Curzon Line" is unlikely to generate much interest,
      >> but
      >> how much do you think a company would pay to see its Web site come up
      >> first in a encyclopedia search for "online dating"? Hosting a project
      >> like Wikipedia isn't cheap. What-Means.com and their ilk have to be
      >> paying for it somehow, and their integrity is already questionable.
      >> Caveat emptor.
      >> bye
      >> Philip
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.