On 12/21/06, Anthony wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
By the way, you cut out the end: "and in the case of a Derivative Work, a credit identifying the use of the Work in the Derivative Work (e.g., "French translation of the Work by Original Author," or "Screenplay based on original Work by Original Author"). Such credit may be implemented in any reasonable manner; provided, however, that in the case of a Derivative Work or Collective Work, at a minimum such credit will appear where any other comparable authorship credit appears and in a manner at least as prominent as such other comparable authorship credit."
Is the credit being displayed for the image in the same place as the text? No, it isn't. Is the credit for the images at least as prominent as the credit for the text? Once again I'd say no.
Yes, I omitted an extra half paragraph which I felt supported my argument, I thought I'd already made my point.
I thought the image page as as prominent as the history page, if not the other way around (after all you often must go through many pages of history to find the actual primary authors of a popular article because of the flood of vandalism)... I'd certainly support changes which make image attribution and text attribution more accessible and equal, so long as such changes don't preclude a professional appearance of the documents or create inappropriate incentives to 'contribute'.