[Foundation-l] Re-licensing

[geni]

2009/1/22 Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org>:
> 2009/1/22 Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com>:
>> 2009/1/22 geni <geniice at gmail.com>:
>>> So what exactly is the problem with requiring credit "reasonable to
>>> the medium or means"?
>
>> The fact that we don't seem to be able to agree on what is reasonable.
>
> I agree that at least the varied interpretations of 'reasonable'
> expressed in this thread indicate a need for a more explicit approach.

There is nothing you can do that will remove that from the crediting
clause. Whatever you try to require there will always be a "reasonable
to the medium or means" filter between you and the reuser. Trying to
engineer around it would be unwise.

> Whether such different perceptions are as wide-spread in the broader
> author community as they are here is not clear.

And unimportant. The license doesn't take into consideration what the
authors consider reasonable to the medium or means.

> I will begin thinking about how a consultative survey could be
> constructed to help inform the process in a timely fashion.

I would suggest that first you try and produce a halfway valid
justification for the 5 name+url proposal before we waste time putting
it out to a survey.

-- 
geni