[Foundation-l] What's appropriate attribution?

[Birgitte SB]

--- On Mon, 10/20/08, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <cimonavaro at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <cimonavaro at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] What's appropriate attribution?
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Date: Monday, October 20, 2008, 4:21 PM
> John at Darkstar wrote:
> > Norwegian law says principal authors should be
> attributed, and I believe
> > its the correct thing to do. It is not a good reason
> to say that today
> > we can't identify those authors. Most of the
> articles I've been involved
> >  in writing has had very few principal authors, most
> of them only one or
> > two.
> >
> > In Norwegian law the principal authors can choose what
> to do with the
> > article, even relicense it, without asking any of the
> other writers.
> >
> > It should be interesting to make some statistics over
> how many principal
> > authors there are for articles from Wikipedia. I think
> the nom are
> > pretty few, even for those articles that has grown
> very large.
> >
> > John
> >   
> 
> In Finnish moral rights law, the right to be identified
> as the author of ones work is inalienable and absolute,
> and cannot be voided even through a contractual
> transaction.
> 


I don't believe the right to be identified as an author is necessarily the same disscusion as the attribution appropriate for various formats. Publishing a work without any explict attribution to an author =! voiding that author's right to be identified as an author of the work. 

Birgitte SB


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com