Scrapbox Citation License

This is still in the idea stage

draft

• Objective.
  • Anything published can be cited. by Article 32 of the Copyright Act, but there is a psychological cost due to ambiguity in that requirement.
  • By making it clear that certain behaviors are okay to do, you lower the psychological cost of those behaviors and make them easier to occur, thereby making it easier for the Scrapbox to function as a network of ideas.
• License
  • Any person A may duplicate any page X of this project in any other public project if the following conditions are met within 24 hours
    • In other words, it is possible to copy and paste an entire page into a public project and then edit it to meet the requirements.
    • Condition 1: A link to X must be placed within the first 5 lines using Scrapbox’s inter-project link notation.
      • The intention is that this link is sufficient to indicate the source.
    • Condition 2: Rows added by A must be at least 20% of the number of rows duplicated from X.
      • The condition equivalent to “qualitatively and quantitatively master-subordinate,” intended to clarify the boundary and to make it considerably looser than the “more than 100%” associated with the term “qualitatively and quantitatively master-subordinate.”
        • I’m not sure I understand what you mean by “number of rows duplicated from X.”
          • Specifically, “Duplicate a 10-line page, delete 5 lines, and add 1 line is OK”.
        • 20% is pretty loose, but could be looser.
          • Compared to ordinary works, the source of reproduction is Scrapbox, which is free and open to the public, and the destination of reproduction is Scrapbox, which is also free and open to the public, so I don’t think it would be a problem even if 100% reproduction is possible because the source is clearly stated.
    • Condition 3: Rows duplicated from X and added by A must be clearly distinguishable.
      • For example, enclose in parentheses, use quotation notation, add an A icon to the number of lines added by A, etc.
        • It is especially important for the Scrapbox Way to clearly state that this “icon notation is a clear distinction”.
    • Condition 4: Notice Clause
      • This clause is still vague.
        • Proposal 1: A mentions on Twitter to the author of X that he/she has duplicated it after fulfilling the other conditions.
          • Concerned that this may be too strong a notification as a mensuration.
        • Proposal 2: A should post a link to the relevant page to their public Twitter account after meeting the other requirements.
          • I think this is a good idea, just assuming you have a public Twitter account? I’m not sure.
        • Proposal 3: We don’t need a notice clause in the first place.
          • I understand this sentiment, but since invoking this license is a kind of social experiment for me, I want the results of the experiment to be easily observable.

cactaceae: is this your intention to actively cite and think on the same topic and try to add and develop your thoughts?

• nishio: thanks for your question. I do not intend to “want” others to do “something”. I am saying that there are already “people doing something” and those people are paying a cost, but it would be more optimal overall to explicitly state “I don’t want it” since I am not benefiting from that cost payment. I would add.

---

This page is auto-translated from /nishio/Scrapbox引用ライセンス using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.