Talk:Palaris revolt

Not a copyright violation
Per Philippine copyright law - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 04:16, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

The copyvio tag has been re-added and then re-removed. I didn't add the material at issue, but I did move it to this article from Philippine revolts against Spain so, even though I don't have a horse in this race, I'm not completely uninvolved. In the hangon tag I placed earlier, I referred to Philippine_copyright_law. That's just a WP article, of course, and is not the final word on the matter. If anyone is interested in a statuatory reference, see the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines. I'm not a lawyer, and I have not looked closely at that. Also, I guess that the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works might come into play here; both the U.S. and the Philippines being parties to that agreement. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 23:26, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, maybe; then again, maybe not ...

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://web.archive.org/web/20060502064044/http://www.pangasinan.gov.ph/towns/palaris.htm. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. While copyright is relinquished in works of the Philippine government for non-commercial use, they reserve the right to require prior approval for commercial reuse and may impose royalties. Our Terms of Use are clear that content imported from elsewhere must be compatible with the Creative Commons Attribution Sharealike license, which means it must be free for commercial reuse and modification. As Philippine copyright law notes, "However, prior approval of the government agency or office wherein the work is created shall be necessary for exploitation of such work for profit. Such agency or office may, among other things, impose as a condition the payment of royalties." For legal reasons, we cannot accept content that is not compatible with our license; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:39, 22 April 2013 (UTC)