[CLUG-chat] OT: Wiktionary - Afrikaans
roland at giesler.za.net
Fri Jun 10 14:46:15 SAST 2005
> Nope, the WAT, just like any other dictionary / thesaurus,
> would be covered under copyright. It would probably be near
> impossible to get permission for its re-use, since they want
> to make money off selling the book.
Isn't this foul-play? The WAT was/is funded by the government, right? So
therefor they should not their content, but give it back to the people who
paid them to compile it in the first instance. (unless of course the new gov
doesn't consider the WAT to be a good thing anymore?)
Of course printing a book costs money and therefor they are fully entitled
to print a volume of the WAT and sell the paper copy it.
For comparison, consider that the BBC has just announced the release of all
their educational and science materials (or is it *everything*) under the
creative commons license. IT was paid for by public money, it therefor goes
back to the public.
More information about the Clug-chat