On 9/11/07, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Well, I
don't know what 'de minimis' is in your opinion, but surely
when we want others to keep to the GFDL, keeping to it ourselves would
be the first thing to do. If we say it's okay to break some rules of
the GFDL, why not others? If it's okay to not make a title page as
required by the GFDL, why is it not okay to not include the full text
of the license?
It all boils down to "the spirit of the license". As long as we don't
violate the spirit of the license (which we don't), we should be fine.
If not legally, then at least morally.
The spirit of the license is that anyone in the world should be able
to easily obtain a copy of the document, make some changes, and
legally publish that fork.
Instead, you get: "You may be able to partially fulfill the latter two
obligations by providing a conspicuous direct link back to the
Wikipedia article hosted on this website. You also need to provide
access to a transparent copy of the new text. However, please note
that the Wikimedia Foundation makes no guarantee to retain authorship
information and a transparent copy of articles. Therefore, you are
encouraged to provide this authorship information and a transparent
copy with your derived works."