|
|
Another copyvio site
[edit]Just as an FYI, I found another copy of Wikivoyage a few days ago: Traveler and Free. This one is a mirror site, which updates in real time (go ahead and find this very post on their mirror of the Pub!). It's not copyleft-compliant: there's no credit given to WV, and each page has a fraudulent copyright symbol on it.
There seems to be real people behind it, as the same site hosts a blog that appears to be original content.
On Monday, I sent an email to the address listed on their contact page, and have also notified Wikimedia Legal.
Will let you know if there are any developments. ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 10:35, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
- Their terms of service reads an absolute joke to me. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:48, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
- Ah, I didn't spot that, but Legal might be interested. It expressly forbids other sites to mirror it!
- Forgot to mention that it's not just a mirror of en.wikivoyage, but of all the language additions.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 10:57, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for taking action. We should have a page with best practices for these cases. –LPfi (talk) 13:27, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
- We do, but it's not very instructive - Wikivoyage:Non-compliant redistribution.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 17:29, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks. I had forgotten about it. There is even your example letter on the talk page. That page helps quite a bit, although it could be improved. I added a paragraph on contributions with copyright. –LPfi (talk) 18:25, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
- @ThunderingTyphoons!: Any advances? –LPfi (talk) 18:15, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
- I'm afraid not. If other users are interested, I recommend writing your own reports to Wikimedia Legal; they're obviously very busy, but if several Wikivoyagers make some noise about this issue, they're more likely to prioritise our case over other stuff they're doing (I work with lawyers IRL, and that's how they operate).--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 20:26, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
- What can they do, other than giving some general advice? They cannot be our lawyers and they don't have any copyrights to the content. If we sue, they can probably give contacts to lawyers in the right jurisdictions (seems to be England, as the London address is marked as "HQ"), but that's about it, I think. –LPfi (talk) 08:38, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
- I sent an e-mail of my own. –LPfi (talk) 09:05, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
- I sent email as well & cc'd legal. Pashley (talk) 14:26, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
- @ThunderingTyphoons!: It's a bit over a month since you started this thread, but have you received an email from Legal yet? If you haven't yet received one, then I'm afraid they're just going to dismiss it. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 12:14, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- I have, actually, but it was so bloody pathetic that sharing it just seemed like a shame. Nonetheless:
- Dear James,
- Thanks so much for running this issue and your draft letter by the Wikimedia legal department! We appreciate your efforts to help address this copyright violation.
- Best, Rosemary Sanz - Wikimedia Foundation Legal Department
- --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 17:19, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Wow, that's like getting a helping hand and a pat on the head, but without the helping hand. Ground Zero (talk) 17:51, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Another wow from me. "Draft letter"??? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 21:37, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Wow, that's like getting a helping hand and a pat on the head, but without the helping hand. Ground Zero (talk) 17:51, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- I have, actually, but it was so bloody pathetic that sharing it just seemed like a shame. Nonetheless:
travelzom
[edit]Hi colleagues wikivoyagers,
FYI, I've stumbled upn this website that seems to duplicate the content from different versions of Wikivoyage (Florence (travelzom.com) vs. Florence (4833176) here) and I've contacted the Wikimedia legal team for a review. Cheers -- Nastoshka (talk) 13:29, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Great discovery, it's unbelievable that these people claim copyright to the content, and their "terms of service" say readers can "temporarily download one copy of the materials on Travelzom's Website for personal, non-commercial transitory viewing only". --Ypsilon (talk) 13:42, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- They say their headquarters is in the UK. Would a UK resident want to send a complaint? Their domain is registered by GoDaddy for Domains By Proxy and their IPs are from Cloudflare. Those are possible secondary complaint contacts. –LPfi (talk) 14:15, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
New copycat site
[edit]I haven't had the time to fully look into it and I've been quite busy IRL this month, but it seems we have a new copycat site called https://www.localcityguide.net/. It mirrors Wikivoyage pages word-for-word with "2022 © Local City Guide. All rights reserved." and some pages like Itineraries ([1]) do nothing to even remove mentions of Wikivoyage. What's interesting about this site is that they've listed those behind the site so openly in the About us section – I'm not sure how accurate it is, but it could be something to go off. What are the WMF's protocols when a site copies an entire project and what can we do about it? //shb (t | c | m) 08:59, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- It has a nice presentation, a handful of blog entries posted in June 2022, and it looks like the foundation of the site is our stuff, refreshed regularly. (Changes I made yesterday already appear.) There is no ability to edit articles. Ground Zero (talk) 10:11, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- This is against the terms of service, CC license restrictions, and American copyright law. You should contact the Legal Team via email at legal[little-anarchy-symbol]wikimedia[point]org. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:22, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- I picked an arbitrary page of which I have knowledge, but which is not on the average tourist itinerary, Estcourt. It has an outline status. I clicked on "outline" and the first sentence read:
- "An outline article is a status rating for any article in Wikivoyage ... " [My emphasis].
- This is proof that they are copying the WIkivoyage site. Martinvl (talk) 16:00, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- It seems that the contents are incorporated by a script directly from Wikivoyage similar to the html frame technology that's why the articles are up-to-date. I made a small change in some status ratings of the German Wikivoyage, and immediately you can read that this is a usable Wikivoyage article in the footer. --RolandUnger (talk) 17:24, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- Copying Wikivoyage's contents is okay. However, you have to provide "reasonable" attribution. That's usually done with something like a simple link to the original article on Wikivoyage. I don't see Wikivoyage mentioned on their website, so they need to fix that – but remember that the goal is for them to fix it, not to punish them or prevent them from sharing our information.
- w:en:WP:BACKWARDSCOPY has some advice on how to contact websites that haven't complied with the license terms. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:27, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- I have sent the developers of the site an email about this. //shb (t | c | m) 02:38, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
- I've also forwarded it to WMF legal (cc Koavf). //shb (t | c | m) 02:40, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
- Merci. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:52, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
- 15 days later and no response. Sigh... :/. //shb (t | c | m) 06:50, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- As expected from copycats. They can't even attribute us for providing free content. Veracious (talk) 09:55, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
- 15 days later and no response. Sigh... :/. //shb (t | c | m) 06:50, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- Merci. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:52, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
- I've also forwarded it to WMF legal (cc Koavf). //shb (t | c | m) 02:40, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
- I have sent the developers of the site an email about this. //shb (t | c | m) 02:38, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
- I picked an arbitrary page of which I have knowledge, but which is not on the average tourist itinerary, Estcourt. It has an outline status. I clicked on "outline" and the first sentence read: