2008/6/4 Andrew Whitworth <wknight8111(a)gmail.com>om>:
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 10:46 PM, geni
<geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
2008/6/4 Andrew Whitworth
<wknight8111(a)gmail.com>om>:
You cannot hold copyright anonymously,
TITLE 17 > CHAPTER 3 > ยง 302 (c)
"In the case of an anonymous work, a pseudonymous work, or a work made
for hire, the copyright endures for a term of 95 years from the year
of its first publication, or a term of 120 years from the year of its
creation, whichever expires first."
You are right, copyright can be held anonymously. I should have said
"it cannot be enforced anonymously". That is, you can't log in to
court with your wikimedia user name.
That doesn't matter though.
Okey if you
want a really formal phrasing. When you release work under
the GFDL you are free to chose what author name you put in the history
section any anyone who wants to use your work or create a derivative
of that they are stuck with your choice. Yes I am aware of the many
many ways this can be abused.
Where in the GFDL does it say that the author can choose the method in
which they must be attributed? The GFDL says only:
I didn't say that although in practice the GFDL does allow that due to
the preserve copyright notices bit but that is of no importance to the
current debate.
"List on the Title Page, as authors, one or more
persons or entities
responsible for authorship ..."
Listing "Whiteknight" on the title page as an author does not give me
proper attribution. Hell, I'm not even the only Whiteknight in all of
wikimedia (hence my interest in SUL conflict resolution). The GFDL
says you must list a person or an entity, and your pseudonymous
account name on a particular webserver counts as neither. The GFDL
says that it must list authors, but does not say that we must list
them in a manner that the authors themselves choose. This
stipulation, while nice, is not included in the license itself and so
is just wishful thinking.
"Preserve the section Entitled "History""
The author
lets you use those contributions as long as you do not
modify the ah author name they put in the history section.
Again, nice but not specified in the license. The author lets you use
those contributions as long as you properly attribute the author.
No they let you use them as long as you follow the GFDL. You appear to
be describeing CC-BY.
Whether you attribute the author using one pseudonym
or another (so
long as both can be traced back to the author uniquely) makes no
difference.
"Preserve the section Entitled "History"" You got that yet? You want
to make of derivative of a work someone has released under the GFDL
you "Preserve the section Entitled "History"".
There is no way around this. That you are also trying to take a course
of action that will put you in breach of most common law based legal
systems let alone Napoleonic code based legal systems doesn't help.
--
geni