2007/9/11, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com>om>:
Surely a title
behind a link that few people ever use is not "a
prominent place preceding the the beginning of the body of the text".
As for it being available with the author list - given that we don't
HAVE an author list as required by the GFDL, that's a hollow phrase.
The history page includes an author list. It's not on the "title
page", admittedly, but that's a pretty minor distinction. I'm no
lawyer, but I'd say any violations of the GFDL on Wikipedia are de
minimis.
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?
--
Andre Engels, andreengels(a)gmail.com
ICQ: 6260644 -- Skype: a_engels