Wikipedia talk:Copyrights/Can I use...: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Line 626:
Below is a discussion I've been having with [[User:Nick|Nick]]. Basically, the entry for External Credit Assessment Institution (ECAI) uses language from the Basel 2 framework where the term is defined. The copyright for the Basel 2 framework permits copying, provided reference is made: [[User:Epstein's Mother|Epstein's Mother]] 14:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
:We can't accept contributions where the contributor is not in a position to licence their contribution under the GFDL licence. It seems from what you've told me that the Bazel Committee would be receptive to a request to licence their work under the GFDL licence. If you could contact them and if permission is forthcoming, forward it onto Wikipedia using the Contact us link to the left, this would facilitate the restoration of the deleted entry. [[User:Nick|Nick]] 23:08, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
:Even that is not necessary. If you notice the copyright on the BIS document, it states: "Bank for International Settlements 2005. All rights reserved. Brief excerpts may be reproduced or translated provided the source is stated." Given that the Basel 2 Framework is 300 pages, the ECAI definition I used is brief, and the ECAI description is cited verbatim in numerous other government documents (for example, by the Committee of European Bank Supervisors (http://www.c-ebs.org/pdfs/GL07.pdf), and the State Bank of Pakistan (http://www.sbp.org.pk/press/2005/Criteria_of_ECAIs.pdf), the language included in the article most certainly fits the definition of fair use. Keep in mind that the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision is a group of governments, not a private entity. The "report" you note is not a private document such as an article, but rather a set of regulatory principles that member governments have agreed to incorporate into their own laws and regulations. "External Credit Assessment Institution" is, therefore, a defined term. In fact, it is term defined by the very language to which you object. No entry on ECAIs could accurately define what it is without citing this language. It would be a bit like defining what a security is under the US Securities Act of 1933 without actually being able to quote the Act itself. An interesting exercise, but fundamentally flawed and legally unnecessary. [[User:Epstein's Mother|Epstein's Mother]] 06:19, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
|