Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2012 February 14

Suspected copyright violations (CorenSearchBot reports)
SCV for 2012-02-14 Edit Wikipedia:Suspected copyright violations/2012-02-14

Masonic Lodges of North Carolina - The vast majority of the article seems to be a copy/paste from the primary source here, but I've also been advised of a "telephone book" exemption of sorts in the discussion.Tyrenon (talk) 12:42, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- In this diff the editor who added the problematic content states that he will request permission for it to be released so that it can be used freely in Wikipedia. --He to Hecuba (talk) 20:03, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Deleted (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Masonic Lodges of North Carolina) predominantly due to copyright issues. --He to Hecuba (talk) 10:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Chinese university ranking (Netbig) - There is some debate among copyright lawyers that university rankings are subject to copyright protection. This is based off of the fact that courts have recognized that although facts are not protectable, prices, value, and other statistics that are a result of complex formulations can indeed be protected by copyright law. This is worth looking into, and I just wanted to flag this potential problem here. JR00576 (talk) 21:15, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. In accordance with the Wikimedia Foundation attorney's advice, we cannot reproduce significant portions of list unless the method of creation is strictly noncreative. See User:Moonriddengirl/Copyright in lists. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:19, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. Quote used untransformatively; removed. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:23, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 01:57, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. Well it wasn't a copypaste of the claimed source (as that was facebook and it clearly said they had taken from us), but some of it was copypasted and led to a whole lot more copypasting from the same website. Contributor may well be connected to the site in question but hasn't contributed in a long time. Cleaned them all and dropped the user a note. --Dpmuk (talk) 01:35, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article deleted. Article has been deleted for a reason other than copyright concerns. --He to Hecuba (talk) 12:39, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 01:34, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 01:31, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]