Forum:Terms of use

An update has been made to Wikia's Terms of use. Wikia also now has a formal privacy policy which you can find here. Angela (talk) 07:06, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Privacy Policy
Typo: "is left on History tab" &rarr; "is left on the History tab"

The following sentence is confusing:
 * All details submitted in regard to your request for the creation of a wiki at Wikia may be made public.

because the page only talks about making an account (not creating a wiki). Perhaps insert "If you request that a wiki be created, ...".

The policy says:
 * Any "optional information" you choose to provide may be made public.

I know it's implied, but should clarify what is the optional data (perhaps it would be sufficient to start a new para before talking about the optional data). Is an email address optional (and so could be made public)?

Maybe make three paras: --JohnBeckett 09:21, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Information required to create an account. The username will be made public; the password and DOB will not be made public.
 * 2) Email address is requested when an account is created. Outline why. Outline policy on use (how often will Wikia send unsolicited mail?). Mention that address becomes public only when user sends to a mailing list, or replies to an email message.
 * 3) Optional information. May be made public.


 * H John. Thanks for your comments, and for reading the new policy so carefully. I've fixed the typo. I've reordered the words in the confusing line about wiki creation. The optional data is listed (“Optional information” that we request you provide may include your first name, last name, and your gender.) The part about email is deliberately before this to (hopefully) make it clear that email isn't part of what would be made public. I think an email policy may be a separate thing which is still needed, but is partly covered in Help:Email notification and c:help:Help:Create an account. It's something which will be considered in future revisions. Angela (talk) 06:11, 7 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Privacy policy link in w:c:messaging:MediaWiki:Monaco-footer-wikia-links should be updated --Ciencia Al Poder (talk) -WikiDex 10:34, 7 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for pointing it out. I've updated that. Angela (talk) 22:35, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Few Questions
--LordTBT Talk! 01:59, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Wikia is revoking the following: "Wikia will never host pop-up adverts" ?
 * 2) If I am "solely responsible" for maintaining a backup, shouldn't this link work?

Answers: Hope that helps. --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 02:07, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Well, I can only aswer the second question since I'm not on the inside.
 * 2) You can use Special:Export to keep copies of pages in XML form on your computer.


 * Hi Michael. I'm curious as to what happened to the full history XML that I could use previously? Your method is possibly the most tedious I have ever heard, do you expect Wookieepedia to do that? --LordTBT Talk! 02:12, 8 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't say we're revoking the part about pop-ups - just that this version was written by lawyers who know better than to make infinite promises! The download link can be found via database download - you just need to add .gz to the end of your link and it will work. Please note that this line doesn't mean that Wikia is not also making backups - of course we are, but things can go wrong! Angela (talk) 03:18, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Additional note: add a .gz to the end of your url above. the offered xml dumps are now compressed to save space and bandwidth --Uberfuzzy 23:14, 12 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, when Angela said it, i udapted the links i put on fr.guildwars and fr.3d in the admin page i've set up on thoses (just an ordinary page that sum up what admin might need). — TulipVorlax 03:04, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

The Club Penguin Fanon gets pop up adverts.

Fair use

 * You may not submit content to the Service that you did not create or that you not have permission to submit.

This could be interpreted to mean "no non-free images without explicit permission from the copyright holder". In other words, every pop culture-related wiki must now delete 98% of its files. Please clarify that that was what you meant. Ryan W 00:15, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It doesn't specify that you need "explicit" permission. Pop culture wikis could use copyrighted images under a "fair use" claim, since they have permission, from US federal guidelines. Non fair use images would still need permission from the copyright holder. inclusivedisjunction 09:32, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * As Wikipedia has discovered, the line between legitimate fair use and copyright violations is quite fuzzy and ill-defined. The actual "federal guidelines" is about a hundred words in the U.S. copyright law... USC 17, section 107:


 * "Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include -


 *  the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
 *  the nature of the copyrighted work;
 *  the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
 *  the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.


 * The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors."


 * There is a huge amount of common law precedence that goes into much more depth on the fine lines here, but even that has exceptions and even conflicting judicial arguments. Most wikis try to use the non-profit, research, and educational exceptions for fair-use (none of which really apply BTW).  I could go on here with fair-use issue, and it could (and does on Wikipedia) cover volumes of discussion on this topic.  From the viewpoint of most content publishers, nearly all images would be considered a copyright violation... including a great many "original" images that have been generated by Wikia users.


 * At best all that can be said here is that Wikia is trying to cover their behinds here with this clause and whitewash themselves from any liability from image copyright holders. It really is a matter of if the copyright holder doesn't mind (too much) for some of their images to be used for what is arguably a promotional site for their product or if they choose to be hard-nosed and enforce copyright.


 * It is also a problem that most of the major publishers, film & television distributors, and music labels would have you believe that there is no concept of fair-use at all, and would frankly be happy if such a concept never existed in the first place. Be aware that fair-use does exist, and if you use copyrighted images you should be writing original critical commentary that accompanies those images.  Still, this is an area of law so full of gray areas that it can sometimes be hard for even a well-read lawyer to be nailed down when asked if a certain usage of an image qualifies as fair-use or if it is a copyright violation.


 * BTW, US law applies here because Wikia is based in the USA. Fair-use doesn't necessarily apply in other countries, so what contributors from places like France may or may not do is even more of muddy waters from a legal perspective.  If this clause in the Wikia terms-of-service agreement is intended to be the first shot across the bow for stronger fair-use rationales or if it is merely to protect the company legally, that is something which can be debated further.  --Robert Horning 18:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)


 * So, living in Canada, i must abide to Fair dealing instead of fair use ? What a pain... — TulipVorlax 16:01, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * But, maybe we should also keep this in mind. — TulipVorlax 16:17, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * What stinks about non-American (or not from the USA) contributors is that technically you have to worry about both legal systems... the one you live under and the American one as well. Yeah, it can be a pain from a legal perspective.  Wikia must follow American law if DMCA requests are filed to remove images, and the DCMA wasn't written with vandals, bots, or wheel warring editors in mind either that may be putting those deleted images back.  Welcome to the digital communications age as judges attempt to apply 18th Century concepts to the 21st Century.  --Robert Horning 08:37, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

If terms of use possibly not met?
If an edit appears not to meet terms of use / User Conduct / content may be defamatory

what action, if any is appropriate?

Advice sought / appreciated in relation to the following edit on sca21

http://sca21.wikia.com/index.php?title=A-Welcome-To-All:_We_Invite_You&curid=2832&diff=31895&oldid=28357

Philralph @ sca21 18:19, November 2, 2009 (UTC)


 * If there's a terms of use issue, you can tell staff about it using special:contact. In this case, I would expect local wiki policies would often cover this sort of edit and an admin or any user could just revert it for being inappropriate - whether or not it's within Wikia's terms of use. On some wikis, they might want to allow opposing views or criticisms but perhaps in the blog namespace instead of on the article page which is not for opinions. But that's up to each wiki to decide to allow or disallow and you need to be careful about whether someone is criticizing an idea or defaming a person. You might decide to allow the former but not the later, but explaining that to new users who just want to get their opinion heard might not be so easy. Angela (talk) 06:46, November 3, 2009 (UTC)