On 11/29/05, Delirium delirium@hackish.org wrote:
Well, it is incumbent on the creator of the work to define "author" and list them in the section labeled "history"; reusers only have to maintain that information, not invent their own. In this case, if Wikipedia puts you in the "history" section when you just rollback vandalism, then it's designating you as an author. If that's not what we want, then the "history" section should be changed, or a new "this is the history for the purpose of the GFDL" section invented.
-Mark
But things like rollback and minor fixes are not posible to copyright. Wouldn't an author have to have some level of copyright ownership over that article (yeah ok I admit I only skimed the GFDL)?
-- geni