Brujula.net is mirroring Wikinews articles with the notice "Wikinews content is not copyrighted but licensed under Creative Commons Attribition 2.5 Licence Brujula.Net © 1995 - 2007". There is no link to the license text. See for instance http://www.brujula.net/english/noticias/wiki/Arsenal_defeat_Manchester_United_at_Emirates_Stadium.html . I don't know how this is generally dealt with here. Superm401 | Talk 04:55, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- I've just managed to convince the site owner to mention the licence, he was also using Wikipedia content without a GFDL-licence and decided to take the content down. I'll send him a short email about it.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:04, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
I think the text on the project page should explicitly state that GFDL, the licence Wikipedia is using, is incompatible. Otherwise I am sure it will happen again that users copy text from wikipedia in here.--Grace E. Dougle 15:57, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Is there a lower bound on complexity for copyrighted material? for example, I copied the template for sic from wikipedia, the full contents of which are: <sup class="noprint">[sic]</sup> which in my opinion is uncopyrightable, but an editor warned me that I needed to get permission from all editors on wikipedia before I do this. Is this true?