On 11/29/05, Delirium <delirium(a)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