Attribution is a dead horse. Point at *any* of our mirrors that attributes. Any one? any? The most that any mirror does is say something like "this came from Wikipedia".
And what has the foundation or any GFDL originator done about it? Nothing, that's what.
**************Vote for your city's best dining and nightlife. City's Best 2008. (http://citysbest.aol.com?ncid=aolacg00050000000102)
On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 2:42 PM, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
Attribution is a dead horse. Point at *any* of our mirrors that attributes. Any one? any? The most that any mirror does is say something like "this came from Wikipedia".
And what has the foundation or any GFDL originator done about it? Nothing, that's what.
Yes, attribution in practice is a major burden in the presence of derived works. Why not change the license?
Amir
**************Vote for your city's best dining and nightlife. City's Best 2008. (http://citysbest.aol.com?ncid=aolacg00050000000102) _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Amir Michail wrote: | On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 2:42 PM, WJhonson@aol.com wrote: |> Attribution is a dead horse. Point at *any* of our mirrors that attributes. |> Any one? any? The most that any mirror does is say something like "this |> came from Wikipedia". |> |> And what has the foundation or any GFDL originator done about it? |> Nothing, that's what. |> | | Yes, attribution in practice is a major burden in the presence of | derived works. Why not change the license?
Because we don't own the content, we're using it under the GFDL like everyone else.
Talks are in with the FSF and the CC people to have them write a more sane licence, but whatever...
- -FFM