Template talk:Infobox Game: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
|||
Line 95:
: I don't have an opinion on what we should do about existing games.
:Some games on external sites specify the licence, but of course it's often an older one rather than a current one. To bring CC and other open licence games in we need to show the license, so a standard way of doing this is appealing --[[User:Eclectics|Eclectics]] ([[User talk:Eclectics|talk]]) 09:26, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
: We should be clear that board games do not have licenses; the ''text'' of game rules and, separately, of wiki pages is copyrighted (automatically, under US law) by their respective authors. That copyright ''may'' have been waived using a CC license. There's nothing we can do if it wasn't, besides take down (or rewrite) any unlicensed text we become aware of and make sure there's some sort of copyleft covering current contributions. --[[User:MCDeMarco]]
:CC doesn't waive copyright, it just gives some permissions, and the SA version of the licences (and other open licences) specify that you have to include a link to the license if you copy the text, so if a game is published under a different open licence I think we need to reference it? --[[User:Eclectics|Eclectics]] ([[User talk:Eclectics|talk]]) 11:08, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
:: Sorry, I should have said waived ''partially or etc.'' My point was rather that games aren't licensed; there is nothing to track down and there is certainly no default value that could be applied to games ''qua'' games. If we're instead talking about researching the copyleft on a ''lot'' of existing wiki text, some of which may be exact reproductions of rules, we should be clear about it. --[[User:MCDeMarco|MCDeMarco]] ([[User talk:MCDeMarco|talk]]) 16:01, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
| |||