On 6/11/07, James Farrar james.farrar@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/06/07, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
A joint work is "a work prepared by two or more authors with the intention that their contributions be merged into inseparable or interdependent parts of a unitary whole." (USC title 17, section 101) I'd say that describes a typical Wikipedia article, though I admit one could argue against it.
It could be argued against, but only by one who does not accept [[WP:OWN]].
Well, I was thinking the best argument against it is that a contributor to a Wikipedia article doesn't know in advance who the other authors are going to be. But it's not clear whether or not that fact is determinative, and I doubt there is actually any case law on the matter. Joint authorship of major copyrighted works is relatively rare nowadays, because the vast majority of major copyrighted works are works for hire. But we *know* Wikipedia isn't a work for hire.