Thread:Janus100/@comment-28398720-20160726205730/@comment-27794543-20160825101743

I have an interest in copyright, trademark, and patent law. Thus I've read about it and often willing to discuss it. If this topic doesn't interest you, then, of course, it's your choice to not partake in the discussion (and not to read anything below). If this was your message wall, I'd end here, but since it's my wall, I can continue with my ramblings :)

I feel it's better not to have a disclaimer on transcripts (but keeping the one on the main page) than to have one that is, in my interpretation, completely false. Though I also believe that attribution is important, even when legality of use is unclear. (i.e. Disclaimer explaining legal use [e.g. fair use] is best, then disclaimer that doesn't explain legal use [states copyright but doesn't mention under which legal rules we're allowed to use the content], then no disclaimer, and worse-case: false disclaimer.)

Just because a disclaimer was made by some random user (with no legal background, given how poorly worded it is and fails to mention copyright) and got copied to a few other wikias (by people with no legal background; you'll find many people on & off wikia who know nothing about copyright law but willing to agree to any disclaimer), doesn't make the disclaimer good. Users on any wiki are allowed to suggest and implement changes that improve the wiki, and I feel that this disclaimer needs a lot of improvement. I find it frustrating when one is okay with a specific addition, regardless of issues pointed out in it, but refuses any changes.


 * "This is a transcribed copy of "episode name". The episode is copyrighted by Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. & CBS Studios Inc. The descriptions added to the transcript are unofficial and written by viewers. This transcript is intended for informational purposes."

This is not a lawyer-written disclaimer, but neither are other disclaimers on fansites (including the one on the main page of this wikia). This disclaimer doesn't have any falsehoods, clearly states ownership, and explains our purpose. No, it doesn't explain under which laws we're using this material, but neither does it make false claims about it.

I'm done with wiki for the day, so till tomorrow.