Slashdot Mirror


Wolfram|Alpha's Surprising Terms of Service

eldavojohn notes that Groklaw is highlighting the unexpected Wolfram|Alpha ToS — unexpected, that is, for those of us accustomed to Google's "just don't use it to break the law, please" terms. Nothing wrong with Wolfram setting any terms they like, of course. Just be aware. "We've seen people comparing Wolfram's Alpha to Google's Search from a technical standpoint but Groklaw outlined the legal differences in a post yesterday. Wolfram|Alpha's terms of use are completely different in that it is not a search engine; it's a computational service. The legalese says that they claim copyright on the each results page and require attribution. So for you academics out there, be careful. Groklaw notes this is interesting considering some of its results quote 2001: A Space Odyssey or Douglas Adams. Claiming copyright on that material may be a bold move. There's more: if you build a service that uses their service or deep-links to it, you may be facilitating your users to break their terms of use, and you may be held liable."

16 of 303 comments (clear)

  1. Of course. by PCM2 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Wolfram Alpha doesn't just provide you with knowledge. It provides you with a new kind of knowledge. Any knowledge you gain from it must be attributed to Stephen Wolfram ... because he invented it. It is actually safer to attribute all citations to Stephen Wolfram, in fact, because he is smarter than you.

    --
    Breakfast served all day!
    1. Re:Of course. by Xtifr · · Score: 3, Funny

      Sorry, I thought it was Wolfram, not Colbert. Guess I'll pay closer attention next time. :)

  2. I'm not sure what to do with your input by Kupfernigk · · Score: 4, Funny

    (c) Wolfram Alpha. From now on, I'm going to make sure that I attribute all failures to understand to Mr. Wolfram.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  3. Re:Search Engine? by SiliconSeraph · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Narrower terms: child pornography" Nice, Wolfram. Thanks.

  4. Re:I JUST BROKE WOLFRAM ALPHA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Input:
    4/0

    Result:
    infinity^~

    Oh noes, I broke their terms of service.

  5. Re:Good Attribution, Useless Result by riskeetee · · Score: 4, Funny

    I asked it "Who farted?" and got:

    Wolfram|Alpha isn't sure what to do with your input.

    Related inputs to try:

    People: ted

    Of course, the correct answer to this question would have been "He who smelt it, dealt it". I remain unimpressed.

  6. Oops! The Vulcan Academy cheer is now copyrighted by Otis+P.+Foont · · Score: 5, Funny

    I innocently entered "Secant Tangent Cosine Sine 3.14159" into WolframAlpha. The result, 74.69263, now belongs to Wolfram. Sorry about that.

    --
    One digit short of a palindrome.
  7. Re:Database Rights? by Fozzyuw · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wolfram is located a few blocks from me in Champaign Illinois

    Or just do what I did and "wolfram Alpha it"* (well, that doesn't quite have the same ring too it).

    * © 2009 Wolfram Alpha LLCâ"A Wolfram Research Company

    --
    "The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth." ~1984 George Orwell
  8. Re:And yet by idontgno · · Score: 2, Funny

    Irony: Wikipedia calling your information service non-authoritative.

    --
    Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  9. Re:This just seals the deal. by oldhack · · Score: 1, Funny

    "Then, a search for "Angelina Jolie nude" resulted in Wolfram|Alpha isn't sure what to do with your input. Hmmmmm."

    Useless crap.

    --
    Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
  10. Re:Hah! by SL+Baur · · Score: 4, Funny

    Come on man, you could at least feed it a useless and disgusting expression.

    If you feed it "goatse" it says it doesn't know what to do with your input. That's a vast improvement over Google.

  11. Re:Hah! by omnichad · · Score: 2, Funny

    Don't forget to put ©Wolfram Alpha at the bottom of your exam.

  12. Re:slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wolfram Alpha sucks anyways. Try looking for big tits on that site. Goes nowhere but the definition.

  13. Re:Hah! by B1oodAnge1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    More importantly, it completely fails at this question: http://www26.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=historical+popularity+trends+of+shaved+genitalia+in+pornography

    I was looking forward to the graph too :-\

    --
    RUGBYRUGBYRUGBY
  14. Re:Hah! by Macthorpe · · Score: 4, Funny

    I've been to <redacted>. Used to be a great town, but now...

    --
    "It does not do to leave a live dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him." - Tolkien
  15. Re:slashdot by Hal_Porter · · Score: 5, Funny

    http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=(sinc+(x)+*+sinc+(y))+

    I'm sure you could do better if you had more time.

    --
    echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;