2009/1/22 Erik Moeller <erik(a)wikimedia.org>rg>:
Yes, and it's quite obvious that if no author name
but a URL is
supplied, then under 4(c)(i) and 4(c)(iii), a re-user would have to
attribute only that URL.
Irrelevant. Most wikipedians do not have usernames that are valid URLs
After all, the license clearly limits name
attribution under 4(c)(i) with the clause "if supplied".
It is supplied unless you are going to allow truly anonymous editing
'reasonable' restriction in 4(c)(iii) is not particularly relevant to
our intended use.
False. Your intended use is to use URL to provide credit. With that
being the case "reasonably practicable"
Furthermore, the license has to be understood in the
allows for such terms exactly to define and clarify its attribution
Only in certain ways and not the ones you propose.
That's why the 'human readable' version of
the license explicitly says
that attribution must happen in the manner specified by the author or
And we all know that the license text provides no such guarantee
otherwise we hit the problem of the manner specified by the author or
licensor being skywriting.
and even the CC website allows you to license a work
the only credit being a URL.
And it has already been explained to you why this is irrelevant to
your proposal. Again most wikipedians do not have names or nics that
are valid URLs.
This URL option is explained in the
licensing help as 'The URL users of the work should link to. For
example, the work's page on the author's site'. This is completely
consistent with linking to an article or history page on Wikipedia.
Nope. Ever tried using that option? It kicks out "This work by
is licensed under a....." This is consistent with the
license treating the URL as the author's pseudonym which can be done.
Just not in the way that you are suggesting or in a way that is of any
real use to wikipedia.
Your repeated assertion that attribution-by-URL is
inconsistent with CC-BY-SA is therefore obviously untrue.
None of the cases you suggest are attribution-by-URL but instead
attribution to a pseudonym that happens to be a URL. There is an
Wikipedia can't make use of the
attribution-to-a-pseudonym-that-happens-to-be-a-URL aproach because,
for example, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Canal&action=history
is not the pseudonym of any author of our canal article nor can it
reasonably be considered an Attribution Party.