Forum:Extremely concerned about copyright violations

I'm Arcane21, and I've been editing on the Tropes Mirror Wiki, and I'm concerned about possible copyright violations I don't believe the administrator is taking seriously enough, and since I recently created a custom CSS template I licensed under CC BY SA 3.0 to that wiki, this worries me.

The copyrights violations that concern me are as follows: The website is a spinoff to TV Tropes.org (it hosts content TV Tropes no longer allows and was basically an alternative for people disenchanted with TV Tropes), which used to be under CC BY SA 3.0 under sometimes in July 2012, then they switched to CC BY NC SA 3.0 for unknown reasons.

Regardless, according to my understanding of Creative Commons licensing, we cannot copy any new pages created under CC BY NC SA 3.0 made from July 2012 onwards (this the administrator agrees on), but the administrator is convinced that if the page preexisted before the license change, copy pasting the source to this wiki is not a problem, but after reading up on the definition of derivative works, I believe that to be wrong.

From my understanding, the pages from TV Tropes that existed up to June 2012 are protected under CC BY SA, and all edits made up to June 2012 are protected by the same, but any edits made afterwards fall under CC BY NC SA, so any derivative edits made to preexisting pages are protected by CC BY NC SA, so we can only use archives from before the license change, older page sources from the Internet Wayback Machine, or we must have some version of page sources from TV Tropes with all derivative edits made after June 30th removed.

However, it seems the administrator does not believe this. He is convinced that if the page preexisted before the license change, the page source can be copied verbatim and that we are free and clear to do so as long as the source is properly attributed (there is a page template made for this purpose), regardless if it contains edits made after the license change or not, and I believe this to be violation of the copyright of the authors of those edits, and I don't like the idea of that happening since I too am the author of a template I copyrighted and wouldn't want someone using it in an unauthorized manner.

I fear the admin of that wiki will not budge on an issue I believe to be dangerous to ignore, and he has made it clear to me he does not believe my concerns are valid and that he does not want me warning the other users of those concerns, and while I'm trying to honor his wishes, I cannot shake the feeling this is thin ice and an unwise course of action, but according to him he refuses to worry about this until Wikia gives him a warning what he's doing is wrong, and even though enough legal alternatives exist to avoid copyright violation, he seems unconcerned, and while I'd like not to be banned from editing on that wiki due to what may just be a difference of opinion, I'm concerned about these copyright issues and would like to know if my fears are justified.Arcane21 (talk) 02:45, October 3, 2012 (UTC)Arcane21
 * The fault here lies primarily with TV Tropes. You cannot relicense CC-BY-SA content as CC-BY-NC-SA. So all edits past the "license change" are not licensed at all! They are not CC-BY-NC-SA, as they derive from incompatibly licensed content, and they are not CC-BY-SA, as editors have not licensed their contributions as such. If you can access versions prior to June 2012, these are CC-BY-SA and will stay so. But that's it.--PedroM (talk) 10:25, October 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * This is a somewhat tricky situation. While Wikia is not in a position to give legal advice or interpret the validity of a license change, it is true that CC licenses are not revocable. Once a work is published under a CC license, licensees may continue using the work according to the license terms for the duration of copyright protection. According to the terms of the CC-BY-SA license it was published under, the original tvtropes.org content can be reused on tvtropesmirror.wikia.com as long as there is proper attribution. This would apply to any content from before the chanegover. It is also permissible to have articles on the same subject and topic. However, without commenting on whether a change of license terms is valid, it makes sense to proceed as if it is. Reusing specific edits and content contributed after the license changed would be a bad idea, even if the page in question was created before the license change. However, as a a host for user generated content, Wikia responds to any copyright issues on receipt of the necessary information in the form of a DMCA notification from the copyright holder or the copyright holder's agent. The notice and takedown provisions of the Digital Millennioum Copyright Act means that the first consequence would be Wikia removing the content. If the content was uploaded repeatedly, the responsible users would be dealt with according to our repeat infringer policy. --semanticdrifter http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb32675/wikia/images/e/e9/WikiaStaff.png (help forum | blog) 17:44, October 8, 2012 (UTC)