Plagiarizing Wikipedia For Profit

An anonymous reader sends word of a dustup involving the publisher John Wiley and Sons and Wikipedia. Two pages from a Wiley book, Black Gold: The New Frontier in Oil for Investors, consist of a verbatim copy from the English Wikipedia article on the Khobar Towers bombing. This is the publisher that touched off a fair use brouhaha earlier this year when they threatened to sue a blogger who had reproduced a chart and a table (fully attributed) from one of their journals.

Comments

So basically you're making my point? ;)

[Moraelin]

So basically you make my point, the way I see it. There _are_ plenty of licenses and flavours to choose, to fit whatever moral code you like. Whether they're called Creative Commons or not, there are already plenty to choose from, and you can even create your own if neither fits your moral principles. The only people left moaning retroactively about morality-vs-legality are the ones who were too stupid to choose the right license. In which case, it's not the world at large or the rule of the law that's at fault there.

That's all I'm saying.