Comments:Polish exercise book advertisement copies Wikipedia content, violates copyright
This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.
Quick hints for new commentators:
- Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
- Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
- You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading
This article seems really biased.--BLaafg (talk) 06:48, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
- How so? It seems to be a fairly clear cut issue, of copyright infringement. Naturally, those making the claim against the "infringers" would have more to say. -- Zanimum (talk) 14:32, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
OH?? REALLY?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.16.22.34 (talk) 06:13, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
[edit]
Why does Wikipedia have this arsey license instead of making the text completely and unreservedly free? I doubt the quote would have been used for the advert if it had to be followed by a footnote saying that the text came from Wikipedia and was written by some guy. That would distract from thrust of the advert. I suppose the idea is to prevent the advertiser from accidentally acquiring the legal ownership of the text, but in the absence of a apparent deliberate effort to do so I think we should let such infringements slide. 81.131.13.145 (talk) 19:19, 2 September 2009 (UTC)